Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 89

POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW 2) Whether AO 308 violates the right to privacy

RULING:
BASIS: Administrative Code during President
Corazon Aquinos time; Yes. AO 308 was a law since it redefines the
parameters of basic rights of citizens in a state which
HOW WILL YOU DESCRIBE: Ople v. Torres Case: should be covered by a law and not an administrative
order. Since citizens cannot transact without the
Points to Remember: PRN, they would have difficulty exercising rights and
enjoy privileges in the state. The defense that it gives
Description of Administrative Code no right and imposes no duty cannot stand.
Description of Administrative Powers
2) Yes, it violates the right to privacy. AO 308 not
Define Administrative Order
only aims to implement the PRN, it also aims to apply
biometrics to all citizens by finger-scanning and
Blas Ople vs. Exec. Sec. Ruben Torres etc.; others. This shows that it is not merely for
National Computer Center (NCC); COA Chair identification but for generation of other data which
G.R. No. 127685. July 23, 1998 may be subject to misuse under A0 308 by several
government agencies.
PUNO, J.:
Sandoval NOTES (as ruled in Ople Case):
FACTS:
DESCRIPTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
On 1996, Pres. Fidel Ramos issued AO 308 for the
National Computerized Identification Reference The Code is a general law and incorporates in a
System which would identify persons seeking basic unified document the major structural, functional
social services. By using the Population Reference and procedural principle of governance (Third
Number (PRN) generated by the National Statistics Whereas Clause, Administrative Code of 1987) and
Office (NSO), it would reduce and avoid fraudulent embodies changes in administrative structures and
transactions. procedures designed to serve the people. (Fourth
Whereas Clause, Administrative Code of 1987) The
AO 308 also provides that the funds necessary for Code is divided into seven (7) books. These books
the implementation of its system would come from contain provisions on the organization, powers and
the budget of the members of the Inter-Agency general administration of departments, bureaus and
Coordinating Committee (IACC) such as the NEDA, offices under the executive branch, the organization
DILG, DOH, GSIS, NSO and NCC. and functions of the Constitutional Commissions and
other constitutional bodies, the rules on the national
Petitioner Sen. Ople filed for a TRO enjoining its government budget, as well as guidelines for the
implementation saying that it is unconstitutional for exercise by administrative agencies of quasi-
usurpation by the president of legislative powers of legislative and quasi-judicial powers. The Code
congress to make laws. covers both the internal administration, i.e., internal
organization, personnel and recruitment, supervision
The provision in appropriating public funds and the and discipline, and the effects of the functions
PRN system should be in a law as within the exclusive performed by administrative officials on private
right of congress and not in a mere administrative individuals or parties outside government.
order since it confers right and imposes duties to
citizens. Lastly, it violates the right to privacy of the
ADMINISTRATIVE POWER:
people.

Respondents contend that it is within the Administrative power is concerned with the work of
administrative power of the President in merely applying policies and enforcing orders as determined
implementing the Administrative Code of 1987 and by proper governmental organs. It enables the
that AO 308 actually protects a persons right to President to fix a uniform standard of administrative
privacy. It confers no right, imposes no duty, affords efficiency and check the official conduct of his
no protection, and creates no office agents. To this end, he can issue administrative
orders, rules and regulations.
ISSUE:

1) Whether AO 308 was a law beyond the power of


the President

Page | 1
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER: department, regardless of its name or


designation.
An administrative order is an ordinance issued by the
President which relates to specific aspects in the
administrative operation of government. It must be (8) Bureau
in harmony with the law and should be for the sole refers to any principal subdivision or unit of
any department. For purposes of Book IV,
purpose of implementing the law and carrying out
this shall include any principal subdivision
the legislative policy.
or unit of any instrumentality given or
assigned the rank of a bureau, regardless
DEFINITIONS under Executive Order 292 of actual name or designation, as in the
case of department-wide regional offices.
SECTION 2. General Terms Defined. Unless
the specific words of the text, or the context as a (9) Office
whole, or a particular statute, shall require a different refers, within the framework of
meaning: governmental organization, to any major
functional unit of a department or bureau
(1) Government of the Republic of the including regional offices. It may also refer
Philippines: to any position held or occupied by
refers to the corporate governmental entity individual persons, whose functions are
through which the functions of government defined by law or regulation.
are exercised throughout the Philippines,
including, save as the contrary appears (10) Instrumentality
from the context, the various arms through refers to any agency of the National
which political authority is made effective in Government, not integrated within the
the Philippines, whether pertaining to the department framework vested with special
autonomous regions, the provincial, city, functions or jurisdiction by law, endowed
municipal or barangay subdivisions or other with some if not all corporate powers,
forms of local government. administering special funds, and enjoying
operational autonomy, usually through a
(2) National Government charter. This term includes regulatory
refers to the entire machinery of the central agencies, chartered institutions and
government, as distinguished from the government-owned or controlled
different forms of local governments. corporations.

(3) Local Government (11) Regulatory agency


refers to the political subdivisions refers to any agency expressly vested with
established by or in accordance with the jurisdiction to regulate, administer or
Constitution. adjudicate matters affecting substantial
rights and interest of private persons, the
(4) Agency of the Government principal powers of which are exercised by
refers to any of the various units of the a collective body, such as a commission,
Government, including a department, board or council.
bureau, office, instrumentality, or
government-owned or controlled (12) Chartered institution
corporation, or a local government or a refers to any agency organized or operating
distinct unit therein. under a special charter, and vested by law
with functions relating to specific
(5) National Agency constitutional policies or objectives. This
refers to a unit of the National Government. term includes the state universities and
colleges and the monetary authority of the
(6) Local Agency State.
refers to a local government or a distinct
unit therein. (13) Government-owned or
controlled corporation
(7) Department refers to any agency organized as a stock
refers to an executive department created or non-stock corporation, vested with
by law. For purposes of Book IV, this shall functions relating to public needs whether
include any instrumentality, as herein governmental or proprietary in nature, and
defined, having or assigned the rank of a owned by the Government directly or
Page | 2
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

through its instrumentalities either wholly, FOR GOCCs (The purpose for which they are
or, where applicable as in the case of stock created) Case of Blaquera
corporations, to the extent of at least fifty-
one (51) per cent of its capital stock: BLAQUERA vs. ALCALA
Provided, That government-owned or G.R. No. 109406, September, 11, 1998
controlled corporations may be further
categorized by the Department of the PURISIMA, J.:
Budget, the Civil Service Commission, and
the Commission on Audit for purposes of FACTS:
the exercise and discharge of their
respective powers, functions and These are consolidated cases challenging the
responsibilities with respect to such constitutionality and validity of Administrative Order
corporations. Nos 29 and 268.

If performing Governmental Function: Administrative Order 268, which was then issued by
Part/Includes in the definition of President Corazon Aquino on February 21, 1992,
Government of the Republic of the grants each official and employees of the
Philippines (GRP) government the productivity incentive benefits in an
amount equivalent to thirty percent of the
If performing Proprietary function: Not part employees one-month basic salary but which
of GRP amount not be less than two thousand pesos. Such
Administrative Order provides that the productivity
(14) Officer as distinguished incentive benefits shall be granted only for the year
from clerk or employee, 1991.
refers to a person whose duties, not being
of a clerical or manual nature, involves the Moreover, all heads of government agencies,
exercise of discretion in the performance of including government owned and controlled
the functions of the government. When corporations and financial institutions are strictly
used with reference to a person having prohibited from granting or availing such benefits for
authority to do a particular act or perform a the year 1992 and the future years pending the
particular function in the exercise of result of comprehensive study being undertaken by
governmental power, officer includes any the Office of the President.
government employee, agent or body Petitioners who are officials and employees of
having authority to do the act or exercise several government departments and agencies were
that function. paid incentive benefits for the year 1992.

(15) Employee However, on January 19, 1993, then President Fidel


when used with reference to a person in the Ramos issued Administrative Order 29 authorizing
public service, includes any person in the the grant of productivity incentive benefits for the
service of the government or any of its year 1992 in the maximum amount of one thousand
agencies, divisions, subdivisions or pesos and reiterating the prohibition under Section 7
instrumentalities. of Administrative Order 268 enjoining the grant of
productivity incentive benefits without prior approval
of the President. Section 4 of Administrative Order
29 directed all departments, offices and agencies
which authorized payment of productivity incentive
bonus for the year 1192 in excess of one thousand
to immediately cause refund of the excess.
Accordingly, compliance for such caused the
deduction from petitioners salaries or allowances of
the amounts needed to cover overpayments as
alleged by the petitioners.

ISSUE:

Whether the issuance of Administrative Orders 29


and 268 were valid exercise of presidential control?

Whether Philippine Tourism Authority is a GOCC and


hence covered by the CS Law.
Page | 3
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

RULING 1: DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY JURISDICTION /


DOCTRINE OF PRIOR RESORT
YES. The court held that the President issued subject
Administrative Orders to regulate the grant of
productivity incentive benefits and to prevent 1. This doctrine states that courts cannot or will
discontentment, dissatisfaction and demoralization not determine a controversy which requires
among government personnel by committing limited the expertise, specialized skills and
resources of government for the equal payment of
incentives and awards. The President was only knowledge of the proper administrative
exercising his power of control by modifying bodies because technical matters of intricate
the acts of the respondents who granted questions of fact are involved.
incentive benefits to their employees without
appropriate clearance from the Office of the
President, thereby resulting to uneven 2. Relief must first be obtained in an
distribution of government resources. administrative proceeding before a remedy
The duty of the President to execute the law is of will be supplied by the court even though the
constitutional origin. So, too, is his control of all matter is within the proper jurisdiction of a
executive departments. Thus, it is, that department
court.
heads are men of his confidence. Neither can it be
said that the President encroached upon the
authority of the Commission on Civil Service to grant
SEE: Case of Villaflor
benefits to governmental personnel. Administrative
Orders 29 and 268 did not revoke the privilege of
employees to receive incentive benefits. The same VILLAFLOR V. CA
merely regulated the grant and amount thereof. GR NO. 95694, OCTOBER 9, 1997

Conformably, it is the President or the head of each PANGANIBAN, J.:


department or agency who is authorized to incur the
necessary expenses involved in the honorary FACTS:
recognition of subordinate officers and employees of
the government. It is not the duty of Commission to In 1940, Villaflor acquired through Deed of Absolute
fix the amount of the incentives. Such function Sales, parcel of agricultural landsfrom different
belongs to the President or his duly empowered alter
owners. The deed states that the land was sold to
ego.
Villaflor but no formal document was then executed,
RULING 2: (Sandoval Notes) and since then until the present time, Villaflor has
been in possession and occupation of the same.
YES. Government-owned or controlled corporations
may perform governmental or proprietary functions In 1946, Villaflor leased to Nasipit Lumber Co., Inc.
or both, depending on the purpose for which they a parcel of land, containing an area of 2 has,
have been created. If the purpose is to obtain special together with all the improvements existing thereon,
corporate benefits or earn pecuniary profit, the for a period of 5 years at a rental of P200.00 per
function is proprietary. If it is in the interest of health, annum to cover the annual rental of house and
safety and for the advancement of public good and building sites for 33 houses or buildings.
welfare, affecting the public in general, the function
is governmental. Powers classified as proprietary In 1948, in an Agreement to Sell Villaflor conveyed
are those intended for private advantage and
to Nasipit Lumber, 2 parcels of land.From said day,
benefit.
the parties agreed that Nasipit Lumber shall continue
to occupy the property not anymore in concept of
SUPERVISION AND CONTROL
lessee but as prospective owners. On 7 December
ARTICLE VII, SECTION 17: 1948, Villaflor and Nasipit Lumber executed an
Agreement, confirming an Agreement to Sell, but
Section 17. The President shall have control of all with reference to the Sales Application filed with the
the executive departments, bureaus, and offices. He Bureau of Land. Sales Application of Villaflor were
shall ensure that the laws be faithfully executed. rejected for having leased the property to another
even before he had acquired transmissible rights
thereto.

Page | 4
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

In August 1950, Villaflor executed a document, jurisdiction; i.e., courts cannot and will not resolve a
denominated as a Deed of Relinquishment of controversy involving a question which is within the
Rights, in favor on Nasipit Lumber, in consideration jurisdiction of an administrative tribunal, especially
of the amount of P5,000 that was to be reimbursed where the question demands the exercise of sound
to the former representing part of the purchase price administrative discretion requiring the special
of the land, the value of the improvements Villaflor knowledge, experience and services of the
administrative tribunal to determine technical and
introduced thereon, and the expenses incurred in the
intricate matters of fact.
publication of the Notice of Sale; in light of his
difficulty to develop the same as Villaflor has moved In recent years, it has been the jurisprudential
to Manila. Pursuant thereto Nasipit Lumber filed a trend to apply this doctrine to cases involving
Sales Application over the 2 parcels of land. Order matters that demand the special competence of
of Award was then issued in favor of Nasipit administrative agencies even if the question involved
Lumber. In 1973, Villafor wrote a letter to Nasipit is also judicial in character. It applies where a claim
Lumber, reminding the latter of their verbal is originally cognizable in the courts, and comes into
agreement in 1955; but the new set of corporate play whenever enforcement of the claim requires the
officers refused to recognize Villaflors claim. In a resolution of issues which, under a regulatory
formal protest dated 31 January 1974 which Villaflor scheme, have been placed within the special
filed with the Bureau of Lands, he protested the Sales competence of an administrative body; in such case,
the judicial process is suspended pending referral of
Application of Nasipit Lumber, claiming that the
such issues to the administrative body for its view.
company has not paid him P5,000.00 as provided in
the Deed of Relinquishment of Rights dated 16
In cases where the doctrine of primary
August 1950. jurisdiction is clearly applicable, the court cannot
arrogate unto itself the authority to resolve a
The Director of Lands found that the payment controversy, the jurisdiction over which is initially
P5,000.00 in the Deed and the consideration in the lodged with an administrative body of special
Agreement to Sell were duly proven, and ordered the competence. In Machete vs. Court of Appeals, the
dismissal of Villaflors protest. In 1978, Villaflor filed Court upheld the primary jurisdiction of the
a complaint in the trial court for Declaration of Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudicatory Board
Nullity of Contract (Deed of Relinquishment of (DARAB) in an agrarian dispute over the payment of
Rights), Recovery of Possession (of two parcels of back rentals under a leasehold
land subject of the contract), and Damages. In contract. In Concerned Officials of the Metropolitan
Waterworks and Sewerage System vs. Vasquez,the
1983, he died. The trial court ordered his widow,
Court recognized that the MWSS was in the best
Lourdes D. Villaflor, to be substituted as petitioner.
position to evaluate and to decide which bid for a
RTC dismissed the complaint. The heirs of petitioner waterworks project was compatible with its
appealed to the Court of Appeals which, however, development plan.
rendered judgment against them. Hence this
petition. The rationale underlying the doctrine of
primary jurisdiction finds application in this case,
ISSUE: since the questions on the identity of the land in
dispute and the factual qualification of private
Whether the findings of the CA conclusive and respondent as an awardee of a sales application
binding upon the SC. (Whether the Doctrine of require a technical determination by the Bureau of
Primary Jurisdiction was observed) Lands as the administrative agency with the
expertise to determine such matters. Because these
issues preclude prior judicial determination, it
RULING:
behooves the courts to stand aside even when they
apparently have statutory power to proceed, in
Yes. Since the doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction was recognition of the primary jurisdiction of the
observed and applied, the findings of RTC and CA administrative agency.
are conclusive and binding upon the SC.
One thrust of the multiplication of administrative
Primary Jurisdiction of the Director of Lands agencies is that the interpretation of contracts and
and Finality of Factual Findings of the Court of the determination of private rights thereunder is no
Appeals longer a uniquely judicial function, exercisable only
by our regular courts
Underlying the rulings of the trial and appellate
courts is the doctrine of primary
Page | 5
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

Petitioner initiated his action with a protest before investigation xxx to determine the following points:
the Bureau of Lands and followed it through in the (a) whether or not the Nasipit Lumber Company, Inc.
Ministry of Natural Resources and thereafter in the paid or reimbursed to Villaflor the consideration of
Office of the President. Consistent with the doctrine the rights in the amount of P5,000.00 and what
of primary jurisdiction, the trial and the appellate evidence the company has to prove payment, the
courts had reason to rely on the findings of these relinquishment of rights being part of the
specialized administrative bodies. administrative process in the disposition of the land
in question.
The primary jurisdiction of the director of lands and
the minister of natural resources over the issues Besides, the authority of the Director of Lands to
regarding the identity of the disputed land and the pass upon and determine questions considered
qualification of an awardee of a sales patent is inherent in or essential to the efficient exercise of his
established by Sections 3 and 4 of Commonwealth powers like the incident at issue, i.e., whether
Act No. 141, also known as the Villaflor had been paid or not, is conceded by law.

Under Public Land Act: Reliance by the trial and the appellate courts on the
factual findings of the Director of Lands and the
Section 3. The Secretary of Agriculture and Minister of Natural Resources is not misplaced. By
Commerce (now Secretary of Natural Resources) reason of the special knowledge and expertise of said
shall be the executive officer charged with carrying administrative agencies over matters falling under
out the provisions of this Act through the Director of their jurisdiction, they are in a better position to pass
Lands, who shall act under his immediate control. judgment thereon; thus, their findings of fact in that
regard are generally accorded great respect, if not
Section 4. Subject to said control, the Director of finality, by the courts. The findings of fact of an
Lands shall have direct executive control of the administrative agency must be respected as long as
survey, classification, lease, sale or any other form they are supported by substantial evidence, even if
of concession or disposition and management of the such evidence might not be overwhelming or even
lands of the public domain, and his decision as to preponderant. It is not the task of an appellate court
questions of fact shall be conclusive when approved to weigh once more the evidence submitted before
by the Secretary of Agriculture and Commerce. the administrative body and to substitute its own
judgment for that of the administrative agency in
Thus, the Director of Lands, in his decision, respect of sufficiency of evidence.
said:
However, the rule that factual findings of an
It is merely whether or not Villaflor has been paid the administrative agency are accorded respect and even
Five Thousand (P5,000.00) Pesos stipulated finality by courts admits of exceptions. This is true
consideration of the deed of relinquishment made by also in assessing factual findings of lower courts. It
him without touching on the nature of the deed of is incumbent on the petitioner to show that the
relinquishment. The administration and disposition resolution of the factual issues by the administrative
of public lands is primarily vested in the Director of agency and/or by the trial court falls under any of
Lands and ultimately with the Secretary of the exceptions. Otherwise, this Court will not disturb
Agriculture and Natural Resources (now Secretary of such findings.
Natural Resources), and to this end
We mention and quote extensively from the rulings
Our Supreme Court has recognized that the Director of the Bureau of Lands and the Minister of Natural
of Lands is a quasi-judicial officer who passes on Resources because the points, questions and issues
issues of mixed facts and law (Ortua vs. Bingson raised by petitioner before the trial court, the
Encarnacion, 59 Phil 440). Sections 3 and 4 of the appellate court and now before this Court are
Public Land Law thus mean that the Secretary of basically the same as those brought up before the
Agriculture and Natural Resources shall be the final aforesaid specialized administrative agencies. As
arbiter on questions of fact in public land conflicts held by the Court of Appeals:
(Heirs of Varela vs. Aquino, 71 Phil 69; Julian vs.
Apostol, 52 Phil 442). We find that the contentious points raised by
The ruling of this Office in its order dated September appellant in this action, are substantially the same
10, 1975, is worth reiterating, thus: matters he raised in BL Claim No. 873 (N). In both
actions, he claimed private ownership over the land
it is our opinion that in the exercise of his power of in question, assailed the validity and effectiveness of
executive control, administrative disposition and the Deed of Relinquishment of Rights he executed in
allegation of public land, the Director of Lands should August 16, 1950, that he had not been paid
entertain the protest of Villaflor and conduct formal the P5,000.00 consideration, the value of the
Page | 6
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

improvements he introduced on the land and other LEONARDO A. PAAT v. COURT OF APPEALS
expenses incurred by him. G.R. No. 111107. January 10, 1997

In this instance, both the principle of primary TORRES, JR., J.:


jurisdiction of administrative agencies and the
doctrine of finality of factual findings of the trial FACTS:
courts, particularly when affirmed by the Court of
Appeals as in this case, militate against petitioners
The truck of private respondent Victoria de Guzman,
cause. Indeed, petitioner has not given us sufficient
reason to deviate from them. while on its way to Bulacan was seized by the DENR
personnel in Aritao, Nueva Vizcaya because the
Discussion of Primary Jurisdiction in case of driver could not produce the required documents for
Villaflor (Sandoval Notes) the forest products found concealed in the truck.
Petitioner Layugan issued an order of confiscation of
Courts cannot and will not resolve a controversy the truck and gave the owner thereof fifteen (15)
involving a question which is within the jurisdiction days to submit an explanation why the truck should
of an administrative tribunal, especially where the not be forfeited. Private respondents, however,
question demands the exercise of sound failed to submit. The Regional Executive Director of
administrative discretion requiring the special DENR sustained Layugans action of confiscation
knowledge, experience and services of the
invoking Section 68-A of Presidential Decree No. 705
administrative tribunal to determine technical and
as amended. Private respondents filed a letter of
intricate matters of fact.
reconsideration which was, denied. The case was
In recent years, it has been the jurisprudential trend brought by the petitioners to the Secretary of DENR.
to apply this doctrine to cases involving matters that Pending resolution however of the appeal, a suit for
demand the special competence of administrative replevin was filed by the private respondents with
agencies even if the question involved is also judicial the Regional Trial Court which issued a writ ordering
in character. It applies where a claim is originally the return of the truck to private respondents. A
cognizable in the courts, and comes into play petition for certiorari was filed by the petitioners with
whenever enforcement of the claim requires the the respondent Court of Appeals which sustained the
resolution of issues which, under a regulatory trial courts order ruling.
scheme, have been placed within the special
competence of an administrative body; in such case, ISSUE:
the judicial process is suspended pending referral of
such issues to the administrative body for its view.
Whether the suit of replevin filed by the private
In cases where the doctrine of primary jurisdiction is respondents be prosper
clearly applicable, the court cannot arrogate unto
itself the authority to resolve a controversy, the RULING:
jurisdiction over which is lodged with an
administrative body of special competence. NO. Before a party is allowed to seek the
intervention of the court, it is a pre-condition that he
should have availed of all the means of
DOCTRINE OF EXHAUSTION OF administrative processes afforded him. If a remedy
ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES within the administrative machinery can still be
resorted to by giving the administrative officer
concerned every opportunity to decide on a matter
Under this doctrine, an administrative decision must that comes within his jurisdiction then such remedy
first be appealed to the administrative superiors up should be exhausted first before courts judicial
to the highest level before it may be elevated to a power can be sought. The premature invocation of
courts intervention is fatal to ones cause of action.
court of justice for review.
The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative
Exceptions remedies was not without its practical and legal
reasons, for one thing, availment of administrative
See: Cases of Paat and Carale remedy entails lesser expenses and provides for a
speedier disposition of controversies.

Page | 7
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

This doctrine is disregarded: CARALE VS. ABARINTOS


G.R. No. 120704. March 3, 1997
(EXCEPTIONS)
DAVIDE, JR., J.:
(1) when there is a violation of due process,
FACTS:
(2) when the issue involved is purely a legal
question, Private Respondent Pontejos was appointed as Labor
Arbitration Associate. However, petitioner Chairman
(3) when the administrative action is patently illegal of the NLRC (Carale), issued Administrative Order
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, No. 10-03 series of 1994, detailing/reassigning
private respondent to the NLRC, Fourth Division,
(4) when there is estoppel on the part of the Cebu City.
administrative agency concerned,
For this reason, Pontejos filed a complaint before the
(5) when there is irreparable injury, RTC of Cebu City against herein petitioners for Illegal
Transfer (R.A. 6715).
(6) when the respondent is a department secretary
whose acts as an alter ego of the President bears the On the other hand, Motions to Dismiss were filed by
implied and assumed approval of the latter, Carale, arguing that it is the CSC which has exclusive
jurisdiction over any question concerning personnel
(7) when to require exhaustion of administrative movement.
remedies would be unreasonable,
(8) when it would amount to a nullification of a claim, Pontejos alleged that there is no other available and
speedy remedy in order to protect his interest than
(9) when the subject matter is a private land in land to resort to this Honorable Court; that the urgency
case proceedings, (10) when the rule does not of judicial intervention is an exception to the rule of
provide a plain, speedy and adequate remedy, and exhaustion of administrative remedies.

(11) when there are circumstances indicating the The RTC dismiss the Motions to Dismiss ruling that
urgency of judicial intervention. the only effect of non-compliance with the rule on
exhaustion of administrative remedies is that it will
In the case at bar, there is no question that the deprive the complainant of a cause of action; it does
controversy was pending before the Secretary of not affect the jurisdiction of the court.
DENR when it was forwarded to him following the Hence, this petition.
denial by the petitioners of the motion for
reconsideration of private respondents through the ISSUE:
order of July 12, 1989. By appealing to him, they
acknowledged the existence of an adequate and Whether administrative remedies must first be
plain remedy still available and open to them in the exhausted before filing a complaint in the court.
ordinary course of the law. Thus, they cannot now,
without violating the principle of exhaustion of RULING:
administrative remedies, seek courts intervention by
filing an action for replevin for the grant of their relief Where the enabling statute indicates a procedure for
during the pendency of an administrative administrative review, and provides a system of
proceedings. administrative appeal, or reconsideration, the courts,
for reasons of law, comity and convenience, will not
entertain a case unless the available administrative
remedies have been resorted to and the appropriate
authorities have been given an opportunity to act
and correct the errors committed in the
administrative forum.

In the instant case, Pontejos did not attempt to seek


administrative relief, which was both available and
sufficient. Initially, he could have asked for
Page | 8
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

reconsideration of the detail order, failing which, he On August 16, 1960, Mamaril, et al. sold Lots No. 1
could have gone directly to the CSC, through the and 4 to Lepanto Consolidated Mining Company
MSPB.
On February 1, 1963, unknown to Lepanto
The accepted exceptions to the rule on exhaustion of Consolidated Mining Company, the Court of First
administrative remedies are the following: Instance of La Union, Second Judicial District, issued
an Order in Land Registration Case No. N-361 (LRC
1. where the question is purely legal; Record No. N-14012) entitled Rafael Galvez,
Applicant, Eliza Bustos, et al., Parties-In-Interest;
2. where judicial intervention is urgent; Republic of the Philippines, Movant declaring OCT
No. 0-381 of the Registry of Deeds for the Province
3. when its application may cause great and of La Union issued in the name of Rafael Galvez, null
irreparable damage; and void, and ordered the cancellation thereof.

4. where the controverted acts violate due On October 28, 1963, Lepanto Consolidated Mining
process; Company sold to herein petitioner Lots No. 1 and 4,
with the deed being entered in TCT NO. 4314 as
5. failure of a high government official from entry No. 12381. Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-
whom relief is sought to act on the matter; 5710 was thus issued in favor of the petitioner which
and starting since then exercised proprietary rights over
Lots No. 1 and 4.
6. when the issue of non-exhaustion of
administrative remedies has been rendered In the meantime, Rafael Galvez filed his motion for
moot. reconsideration against the order issued by the trial
court declaring OCT No. 0-381 null and void. The
Sandoval Notes: motion was denied on January 25, 1965. On appeal,
the Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the Republic of
Non-exhaustion of administrative remedies is not the Philippines in a Resolution promulgated on
jurisdictional. It only renders the action premature, August 14, 1973 in CA-G. R. No. 36061-R.
i.e., claimed cause of action is not ripe for judicial
determination and for that reason a party has no Thereafter, the Court of Appeals issued an Entry of
cause of action to ventilate in court. Judgment, certifying that its decision dated August
14, 1973 became final and executory on October 23,
1973.
WHEN MAY THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT
VALIDLY INVOKE THAT PRESCRIPTION MAY On April 22, 1974, the trial court in L. R. C. Case No.
RUN AGAINST THE STATE? N-361 issued a writ of execution of the judgment
which was served on the Register of Deeds, San
See:Case of Shipside Fernando, La Union on April 29, 1974.

SHIPSIDE INCORPORATED, vs. CA Twenty-four long years thereafter, on January 14,


G.R. No. 143377. February 20, 2001 1999, the Office of the Solicitor General received a
letter dated January 11, 1999 from Mr. Victor
MELO, J.: G. Floresca, Vice-President, John Hay Poro Point
Development Corporation, stating that the
FACTS: aforementioned orders and decision of the trial court
in L. R. C. No. N-361 have not been executed by the
On October 29, 1958, Original Certificate of Title No. Register of Deeds, San Fernando, La Union despite
0-381 was issued in favor of Rafael Galvez, over four receipt of the writ of execution.
parcels of land Lot 1, Lot 2, Lot 3 and Lot 4.
On April 11, 1960, Lots No. 1 and 4 were conveyed On April 21, 1999, the Office of the Solicitor General
by Rafael Galvez in favor of Filipina Mamaril, filed a complaint for revival of judgment and
Cleopatra Llana, Regina Bustos, and Erlinda Balatbat cancellation of titles before the Regional Trial Court
in a deed of sale which was inscribed as Entry No. of the First Judicial Region (Branch 26, San
9115 OCT No. 0-381 on August 10, 1960. Fernando, La Union) docketed therein as Civil Case
No. 6346
Page | 9
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

In its complaint in Civil Case No. 6346, the Solicitor On May 23, 2000, the Court of Appeals denied
General argued that since the trial court in LRC Case petitioners motion for reconsideration on the
No. 361 had ruled and declared OCT No. 0-381 to be grounds that: (1) a complaint filed on behalf of a
null and void, which ruling was subsequently corporation can be made only if authorized by its
affirmed by the Court of Appeals, the defendants- Board of Directors, and in the absence thereof, the
successors-in-interest of Rafael Galvez have no valid petition cannot prosper and be granted due
title over the property covered by OCT No. 0-381, course;and (2) petitioner was unable to show that it
and the subsequent Torrens titles issued in their had substantially complied with the rule requiring
names should be consequently cancelled. proof of authority to institute an action or
proceeding.
On July 22, 1999, petitioner Shipside, Inc. filed its
Motion to Dismiss, based on the following ISSUES:
grounds: (1) the complaint stated no cause of action
because only final and executory judgments may be 1. whether the petition under the signature of
subject of an action for revival of judgment; (2) the Lorenzo Balbin, Jr., should be dismissed for
plaintiff is not the real party-in-interest because the it was made without authority? (Admin
real property covered by the Torrens titles sought to Issue)
be cancelled, allegedly part of Camp Wallace
(Wallace Air Station), were under the ownership and 2. whether the Republic of the Philippines can
administration of the Bases Conversion Development maintain the action for revival of judgment?
Authority (BCDA) under Republic Act No. 7227; (3) (Procedural Issue)
plaintiffs cause of action is barred by prescription;
(4) twenty-five years having lapsed since the
issuance of the writ of execution, no action for revival RULING:
of judgment may be instituted because under
Paragraph 3 of Article 1144 of the Civil Code, such 1. No, The Court has consistently held that the
action may be brought only within ten (10) years requirement regarding verification of a
from the time the judgment had been rendered. pleading is formal, not jurisdictional. Such
requirement is simply a condition affecting
An opposition to the motion to dismiss was filed by the form of the pleading, non-compliance
the Solicitor General on August 23, 1999, alleging with which does not necessarily render the
among others, that: (1) the real party-in-interest is pleading fatally defective.
the Republic of the Philippines; and (2) prescription
does not run against the State. On the other hand, the failure of the
petitioner to submit the required
On August 31, 1999, the trial court denied petitioners documents that should accompany the
motion to dismiss and on October 14, 1999, its petition, including the certification against
motion for reconsideration was likewise turned forum shopping, shall be sufficient ground
down. for the dismissal thereof. The same rule
applies to certifications against forum
On October 21, 1999, petitioner instituted a petition shopping signed by a person on behalf of a
for certiorari and prohibition with the Court of corporation which are unaccompanied by
Appeals, docketed therein as CA-G.R. SP No. 55535, proof that said signatory is authorized to file
on the ground that the orders of the trial court a petition on behalf of the corporation.
denying its motion to dismiss and its subsequent
motion for reconsideration were issued in excess of In certain exceptional circumstances,
jurisdiction. however, the Court has allowed the belated
filing of the certification.in Loyola,
On November 4, 1999, the Court of Appeals Roadway, and Uy, the Court excused non-
dismissed the petition in CA-G.R. SP No. 55535 on compliance with the requirement as to the
the ground that the verification and certification in certificate of non-forum shopping. With
the petition, under the signature of Lorenzo Balbin, more reason should we allow the instant
Jr., was made without authority, there being no petition since petitioner herein did submit a
proof therein that Balbin was authorized to institute certification on non-forum shopping, failing
the petition for and in behalf and of petitioner. only to show proof that the signatory was
Page | 10
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

authorized to do so. That petitioner REPUBLIC vs. EXTELCOM


subsequently submitted a secretarys G.R. No. 147210. January 15, 2002
certificate attesting that Balbin was .
authorized to file an action on behalf of YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.:
petitioner likewise mitigates this oversight.
FACTS:
2. No, the Republic of the Philippines cannot
maintain the action for revival of judgment. On December 29, 1992, the International
Communications Corporation (now Bayantel) filed
The Solicitor General, argues that the an application with the NTC for a CPCN to install,
States cause of action in the cancellation of operate and maintain a digital Cellular Mobile
the land title issued to petitioners Telephone System/Service (CMTS) with prayer for a
predecessor-in-interest is imprescriptible Provisional Authority (PA)
because it is included in Camp Wallace,
which belongs to the government.This is However, Express Telecommunication Co., Inc.
misleading. (Extelcom) filed in NTC an Opposition prayingfor the
dismissal of Bayantels application. On May 3, 2000,
With the transfer of Camp Wallace to the the NTC issued an Order granting in favor of
BCDA, the government no longer has a Bayantel, applying Rule 15, Section 3 of its 1978
right or interest to protect. Consequently, Rules of Practice and Procedure. Extelcom filed with
the Republic is not a real party in interest the CA a petition seeking the annulment of the Order
and it may not institute the instant of the RTC, which was eventually granted by
action. Nor may it raise the defense of the CA. Aggrieved, Bayantel brought the case to the
imprescriptibility, the same being applicable SC. Extelcom contends that the NTC should have
only in cases where the government is a applied the Revised Rules which were filed with the
party in interest. Under Section 2 of Rule 3 Office of the NAR on February 3, 1993. The NTC, on
of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, every the other hand, issued a certification to the effect
action must be prosecuted or defended in that inasmuch as the 1993 Revised Rules have not
the name of the real party in interest. To been published in a newspaper of general
qualify a person to be a real party in interest circulation, the NTC has been applying the 1978
in whose name an action must be Rules. Thus, the present petition.
prosecuted, he must appear to be the
present real owner of the right sought to Sandoval Notes: (Issue and Ruling)
enforced. A real party in interest is the party
who stands to be benefited or injured by Discuss the nature and functions of the NTC,
the judgment in the suit, or the party and analyze its powers and authority as well
entitled to the avails of the suit. And by real as the laws, rules and regulations that govern
its existence and operations.
interest is meant a present substantial
interest, as distinguished from a mere
RULING:
expectancy, or a future, contingent,
subordinate or consequential interest. The NTC was created pursuant to Executive Order
No. 546, promulgated on July 23, 1979. It assumed
The BCDA is an entity invested with a the functions formerly assigned to the Board of
personality separate and distinct from the Communications and the Communications Control
government. Bureau, which were both abolished under the said
Executive Order. Previously, the NTCs function were
merely those of the defunct Public Service
Commission (PSC), created under Commonwealth
Act No. 146, as amended, otherwise known as the
Public Service Act, considering that the Board of
Communications was the successor-in-interest of the
PSC. Under Executive Order No. 125-A, issued in
April 1987, the NTC became an attached agency of
the Department of Transportation and
Communications.

Page | 11
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

In the regulatory communications industry, the NTC The absence of publication, coupled with the
has the sole authority to issue Certificates of Public certification by the Commissioner of the NTC stating
Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) for the that the NTC was still governed by the 1987 Rules,
installation, operation, and maintenance of clearly indicate that the 1993 Revised Rules have not
communications facilities and services, radio taken effect at the time of the grant of the
communications systems, telephone and telegraph provisional authority to Bayantel. The fact that the
systems. Such power includes the authority to 1993 Revised Rules were filed with the UP Law
determine the areas of operations of applicants for Center on February 3, 1993 is of no moment. There
telecommunications services. Specifically, Section 16 is nothing in the Administrative Code of 1987 which
of the Public Service Act authorizes the then PSC, implies that the filing of the rules with the UP Law
upon notice and hearing, to issue Certificates of Center is the operative act that gives the rules force
Public Convenience for the operation of public and effect. Book VII, Chapter 2, Section 3 thereof
services within the Philippines whenever the merely states:
Commission finds that the operation of the public
service proposed and the authorization to do Filing. (1) Every agency shall file with the University
business will promote the public interests in a proper of the Philippines Law Center three (3) certified
and suitable manner. (Commonwealth Act No. 146, copies of every rule adopted by it. Rules in force on
Section 16[a]) The procedure governing the issuance the date of effectivity of this Code which are not filed
of such authorizations is set forth in Section 29 of the within three (3) months from the date shall not
said Act. thereafter be the basis of any sanction against any
party or persons.
Is the filing of the administrative rules and
regulations with the UP Law Center the (2) The records officer of the agency, or his
operative act that gives the rules force and equivalent functionary, shall carry out the
effect? requirements of this section under pain of
disciplinary action.
RULING:
(3) A permanent register of all rules shall be kept by
In granting Bayantel the provisional authority to the issuing agency and shall be open to public
operate a CMTS, the NTC applied Rule 15, Section 3 inspection.
of its 1978 Rules of Practice and Procedure, which
provides: This Court, in Tanada v. Tuvera (G.R. No. L-63915,
December 29, 1986, 146 SCRA 446) stated, thus:
Sec. 3. Provisional Relief. Upon the filing of an
application, complaint or petition or at any stage We hold therefore that all statutes, including those
thereafter, the Board may grant on motion of the of local application and private laws, shall be
pleader or on its own initiative, the relief prayed for, published as a condition for their effectivity, which
based on the pleading, together with the affidavits shall begin fifteen days after publication unless a
and supporting documents attached thereto, without different effectivity is fixed by the legislature.
prejudice to a final decision after completion of the
hearing which shall be called within thirty (30) days Covered by this rule are presidential decrees and
from grant of authority asked for. (italics ours) executive orders promulgated by the President in the
exercise of legislative power or, at present, directly
Respondent Extelcom, however, contends that the conferred by the Constitution. Administrative Rules
NTC should have applied the Revised Rules which and Regulations must also be published if their
were filed with the Office of the National purpose is to enforce or implement existing law
Administrative Register on February 3, 1993. These pursuant also to a valid delegation.
Revised Rules deleted the phrase on its own
initiative; accordingly, a provisional authority may Interpretative regulations and those merely internal
be issued only upon filing of the proper motion in nature, that is, regulating only the personnel of
before the Commission. the administrative agency and not the public, need
not be published. Neither is publication required of
In answer to this argument, the NTC, through the the so-called letters of instructions issued by
Secretary of the Commission, issued a certification to administrative superiors concerning the rules or
the effect that inasmuch as the 1993 Revised Rules guidelines to be followed by their subordinates in the
have not been published in a newspaper of general performance of their duties.
circulation, the NTC has been applying the 1978
Rules. We agree that the publication must be in full or it is
no publication at all since its purpose is to inform the
public of the contents of the laws.
Page | 12
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

The Administrative Order under consideration is one 4. To Execute Laws


of those issuances which should be published for its
effectivity, since its purpose is to enforce and ADMINISTRATIVE RELATIONSHIPS
implement an existing law pursuant to a valid
delegation, i.e., P.D. 1071, in relation to LOI 444 and Involve Admin Agencies mere
EO 133 (Philippine International Trading Corp. v. supervision/oversee
Angeles, 263 SCRA 421, 446-447 [1996]).
See: case of Beja
Thus, publication in the Official Gazette or a
newspaper of general circulation is a condition sine
qua non before statutes, rules or regulations can BEJA vs. CA
take effect. This is explicit from Executive Order No. G.R. No. 97149. March 31, 1992
200, which repealed Article 2 of the Civil Code, and
which states that: ROMERO, J.:

Laws shall take effect after fifteen days following the FACTS:
completion of their publication either in the Official
Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation in Fidencio Beja Sr. an employee of Philippine ports
the Philippines, unless it is otherwise provided (E.O. authority, hired as Arrastre supervisor in 1975 and
200, Section 1). later on appointed as terminal supervisor in 1988. On
October 21, 1988, the General Manager, Rogelio A.
The Rules of Practice and Procedure of the NTC, Dayan filed administrative case against Beja Sr. and
which implements Section 29 of the Public Service Villaluz for grave dishonesty. Grave misconduct
Act (C.A. 146, as amended), fall squarely within the willful violation of reasonable office rules and
scope of these laws, as explicitly mentioned in the regulations and conduct prejudicial to the best
case of Tanada v. Tuvera (146 SCRA 446 [1986]). interest of the service. Consequently, they were
preventively suspended for the charges. After
Our pronouncement in Tanada v. Tuvera is clear and preliminary investigation conducted by the district
categorical. Administrative rules and regulations attorney for region X, administrative case was
must be published if their purpose is to enforce or considered closed for lack of merit.
implement existing law pursuant to a valid
delegation. The only exception are interpretative On December 13, 1988 another administrative case
regulations, those merely internal in nature, or those was filed against Beja by the PPA manager also for
so-called letters of instructions issued by dishonesty grave misconduct violation of office rules
administrative superiors concerning the rules and and regulations, conduct prejudicial to the best
guidelines to be followed by their subordinates in the interest of the service and for being notoriously
performance of their duties (PHILSA International undesirable. Beja was also placed under preventive
Placement & Services Corp. v. Secretary of Labor, suspension pursuant to sec. 412 of PD No. 807. The
G.R. No. 103144, April 4, 2001, 356 SCRA 174). case was redocketed and thereafter, the PPA
indorsed it to the AAB for appropriate action.
Hence, the 1993 Revised Rules should be published
in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general The AAB proceeded to hear the case and gave Beja
an opportunity to present evidence. However, on
circulation before it can take effect. Even the 1993
February 20, 1989, Beja filed petition for certiorari
Revised Rules itself mandates that said Rules shall
with preliminary injunction before the Regional Trial
take effect only after their publication in a newspaper Court of Misamis Oriental. Two days later, he filed
of general circulation (Section 20 thereof). In the with the ABB a manifestation and motion to suspend
absence of such publication, therefore, it is the 1978 the hearing of administrative case on account of the
Rules that governs. pendency of the certiorari proceeding before the
court. AAB denied the motion and continued with the
hearing of the administrative case. Thereafter, Beja
moved for the dismissal of the certiorari case and
POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF
proceeded to file before the Court for a petition for
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
certiorari with preliminary injunction and/or
temporary restraining order.
GENERALLY: How Describe?
ISSUE:
1. To Enforce
2. To Implement Whether the Administrative Action Board of DOTC
3. To Administer has jurisdiction over administrative cases involving
personnel below the rank of Assistant General
Page | 13
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

Manager of the Philippine Ports Authority, an actions in accordance with the decentralization of
attached agency of DOTC. personnel functions under the administrative Code
of 1987. The Law impliedly grants the general
RULING:
Manager with the approval of the PPA board of
Directors the power to investigate its personnel
The PPA General Manager is the disciplining
below the rank of Assistant Manager who may be
authority who may, by himself and without the
charged with an administrative offense. During such
approval of the PPA Board of Directors, subject a
investigation, the PPA General Manager, may subject
respondent in an administrative case to preventive
the employee concerned to preventive suspension.
suspension. His disciplining powers are sanctioned
The investigation should be conducted in accordance
not only by Sec.8 of PD no. 857 but also by Sec. 37
with the procedure set out in Sec. 38 of PD no. 807.
of PD no. 807 granting the heads of agencies the
Jurisdiction to investigate and decide matters
involving disciplinary actions against officers and
employees in the PPA. With respect to the issue, the DOCTRINE OF DELEGATION OF POWERS
Court qualifiedly rules in favor of the petitioner. The
*Legislative powers
PPA was created through PD no. 505 dated July
1974. Under the Law, the corporate powers of the
Rule: A Power already delegated must no
PPA were vested in a governing Board of Directors longer be delegated.
known as the Philippine Ports Authority Council. Sec.
5(i) of the same decree gave the council the power EXCEPTIONS:
to appoint, discipline and remove, and determine
the composition of the technical staff of the authority 1. Local Government
and other personnel. On December 23, 1975, PD 2. President (tariff powers)
no. 505 was substituted by PD no. 857 sec. 4(a) 3. Administrative Bodies
thereof created the Philippine Ports Authority which 4. Emergency Powers of the Government
would be attached to the then Department of Public 5. People at Large through Plebiscite &
Works, Transportation and Communication. When Referendum
Executive order no. 125 dated January 30, 1987
reorganizing the Ministry of Transportation and TESTS OF VALID DELEGATION:
Communication was issued, the PPA retained its
1. COMPLETENESS TEST: Complete in
attached status. Administrative Code of 1987
itself.
classified PPA as an attached agency to the DOTC.
Book IV of the Administrative Code of 1987, the *This means that the law must be complete in all its
other two being supervision and control and terms and conditions when it leaves the legislature
administrative supervision, Attachment is defined so that when it reaches the delegate, it will have
as the lateral relationship between the department nothing to do but to enforce it.
or its equivalent and the attached agency or
corporation for purposes of policy and program 2. SUFFICIENT STANDARDS TEST: The
coordination. An attached agency has a larger law must offer sufficient standard that must
measure of independence from the Department to be determinate or atleast be determinable
which it is attached than one which is under to specify limits of the delegated authority
departmental supervision and control or and specify conditions under which it is to
administrative supervision. This is borne out by the be implemented.
lateral relationship between the Department and
the attached agency. The attachment is merely for
KINDS OF ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATION
policy and program coordination. With respect to
administrative matters, the independence of an
1. Legislative Regulation: must be
attached agency from the department control and
published/exercising quasi-legislative
supervision is furthermore reinforced by the fact that power
even an agency under a Departments administrative
supervision is free from Departmental interference a. Contingent
with respect to appointments and other personnel b. Supplemental
Page | 14
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

2. Interpretative Regulation: Internal (146 SCRA 446; December 29, 1986)


Regulations
1) Whether a distinction be made between laws of
See: Case of Taada general applicability and laws which are not as to
their publication
*Article 2 : Civil Code
2) Whether a publication shall be made in
TAADA vs. TUVERA
publications of general circulation
G.R. No. L-63915 April 24, 1985
RULING:
ESCOLIN, J.:

(136 SCRA 27; April 24, 1985)


FACTS:

1) The court held that all statute including those of


Petitioners filed a writ of mandamus to compel
local application shall be published as condition for
respondent public officials to publish and/or cause to
their effectivity, which shall begin 15 days after
publish various presidential decrees, letters of
publication unless a different effectivity date is fixed
instructions, general orders, proclamations,
by the legislature.
executive orders, letters of implementations and
administrative orders.
The clear object of this provision is to give the
They invoke the right of the people to be informed
general public adequate notice of the various laws
on matters of public concern as well as the principle
which are to regulate their actions and conduct as
that laws, to be valid and enforceable, must be
citizens. Without such notice and publication, there
published in the Official Gazette.
would be no basis for the application of the maxim
ignoratia legis nominem excusat. It would be the
The government argued that while publication was
height of injustice to punish or otherwise burden a
necessary as a rule, it was not so when it was
citizen for the transgression of a law which he had
otherwise provided, as when the decrees themselves
no notice whatsoever, not even a constructive one.
declared that they were to become effective
immediately upon approval. The court decided on
2) The publication must be full or no publication at
April 24, 1985 in affirming the necessity for
all since its purpose is to inform the public of the
publication of some of the decrees. The court
content of the laws.
ordered the respondents to publish in the official
gazette all unpublished Presidential Issuances which
(146 SCRA 446; December 29, 1986)
are of general force and effect.
The petitioners suggest that there should be no
1) All statutes, including those of local application
distinction between laws of general applicability and
and private laws, shall be published as a condition
those which are not. The publication means
for their effectivity, which shall begin 15 days after
complete publication, and that publication must be
publication unless a different effectivity date is fixed
made in the official gazette.
by the legislature.

ISSUES:
2) Article 2 of the Civil Code provides that publication
of laws must be made in the Official Gazette, and not
(136 SCRA 27; April 24, 1985)
elsewhere, as a requirement for their effectivity. The
1) Whether all laws shall be published in the official
Supreme Court is not called upon to rule upon the
gazette
wisdom of a law or to repeal or modify it if it finds it
impractical.
2) Whether publication in the official gazette must
be in full

Page | 15
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

REQUISITE OF A VALID ADMINISTRATIVE Marcoss PD 807 (Civil Service Decree), which


REGULATION: established a new CSC and superseded RA 2260, also
provided that rules and regulations shall become
1. Its promulgation must be authorized by the effective only 30 days after publication in the OG or
legislature in any newspaper of general circulation. The new
2. It must be within the scope of the authority CSC adopted the CSRPAP. No provision re prohibition
of appointment of 57-year-old made in PD 807;
given by the legislature.
prohibition was purely created by CSC.
3. It must be promulgated in accordance with
the prescribed procedure. The provision cannot be valid, being entirely a CSC
4. It must be reasonable. creation, it has no basis in the law which it was
meant to implement. It cannot be justified as a valid
*OTHERWISE, In EXCESS of authority. exercise of its function of promulgating rules and
regulations for that function, to repeat, may
See: Case of Toledo (Second Requisite) legitimately be exercised only for the purpose of
carrying the provisions of the law into effect; and
TOLEDO VS. COMELEC & CSC since there is no prohibition or restriction on the
GR No. 135864. November 24, 1999 employment of 57-year old persons in the statute
or any provision respecting age as a factor in
employmentthere was nothing to carry into effect
PURISIMA, J.:
through an implementing rule on the matter. The
power vested in the CSC was to implement the law
FACTS:
or put it into effect, not to add to it; to carry the law
into effect or execution, not to supply perceived
Atty. Augusto Toledo was appointed by then omissions in it.
Comelec Chairman Ramon Felipe as Manager of the
Education and Information Department of the Additionally, the CSRPAP cannot be considered
Comelec on May 1986, at which time Toledo was
effective as of the time of the application to Toledo
already more than 57 years old. Toledos of a provision thereof, for the reason that said rules
appointment papers and his oath of office were
were never published as required by both RA 2260
endorsed by the Comelec to the CSC on June 1986 and PD 807. The argument that it was a mere
for approval and attestation. However, no prior
reiteration of existing law and circularized cannot
request for exemption from the provisions of Section stand as formerly discussed.
22, Rule III of the CSRPAPwhich prohibits the
appointment of persons 57 years old or above into Also, Toledos separation from service was through
government service without prior CSC approvalwas
no fault of his own. Petition granted.
secured. Petitioner then reported for work.
PHILSA INTERNATIONAL PLACEMENT and
Comelec, upon discovery of the lack of authority
SERVICES CORPORATIONvs. THE HON.
required under CSRPAP, and CSC Memo Circular 5
SECRETARY OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT;
issued Resolution No. 2066, which declared void
VIVENCIO DE MESA, RODRIGO MIKIN and
from the beginning Toledos appointment. Petitioner
CEDRIC LEYSON G.R. No. 103144. April 4,
appealed to CSC, which considered him a de facto
2001
officer and his appointment voidable, and moved for
reconsideration but was denied, hence the present
GONZAGA-REYES, J.:
petition for certiorari.
FACTS:
ISSUE:
Petitioner Philsa International Placement and
W/N CSRPAP provision is valid
Services Corporation (Philsa) is a domestic
corporation engaged in the recruitment of workers
RULING:
for overseas employment. In 1985, private
respondents were recruited by petitioner for
No. The Civil Service Act of 959 (RA 2260), which
employment in Saudi Arabia each paying placement
established the CSC, contained no provision
fees of P5,000 for Mikin and P6,500 for De Mesa and
prohibiting appointment or reinstatement into
Leyson.
government service of any person already 57 years
old. Sec 5 Rule 6 of the Revised Civil Service Rules,
After being deployed in Saudi, the private
which prohibits such, was purely the creation of CSC.
respondents were forced to sign a second and third
contract by their foreign employer Al-Hejailan,
Page | 16
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

increasing their work hours from 48 hours to 60 hour SG that this memo had basis other than the POEA
without additional pay. When they refused to sign, memo cannot stand because the memo itself did not
their work contract was terminated and were cite the Art. 32 and 34 of the labor Code.
repatriated to the Philippines.
And since under Book VI, Chapter II, Section 3 of the
The private respondents filed a case before the POEA Administrative Code of 1987, rules in force on the
for illegal exaction and contract substitution to the date of effetivity were not filed within three months
POEA Hearing Officer for both offices of the Workers' shall not become the basis of any sanction against
Assistance and Adjudication Office (POEA-WAAO) for any party or persons. Hence, the petitioner cannot
complaints on money claims of OFWs and the be liable for damages under the said POEA memos.
Licensing and Recruitment Office (POEA-LRO), for
cases involving recruitment violations warranting Citing Tanada vs. Tuvera, administrative rules and
suspension or cancellation of license. regulations must also be published if their purpose is
to enforce or implement existing law pursuant to a
POEA ruled in favor of private respondents and valid delegation.
granted the award for damages for illegal exaction in
violation of POEA Memorandum Circular No. 11, Interpretative regulations and those merely internal
Series of 1983 which enumerated the allowable fees in nature, that is, regulating only the personnel of
which may be collected from applicant, and POEA the administrative agency and the public, need not
Memorandum Order No. 2, Series of 1983 providing be published. Neither is publication required of the
for the applicable schedule of placement and so-called letter of instructions issued by the
documentation fees for private employment agencies administrative superiors concerning the rules or
not more than P2,500 in compliance with Sec. 32 and guidelines to be followed by their subordinates in the
34 of the Labor Code. performance of their duties.

Philsa appealed to the Sec. of Labor and Employment Sandoval Notes:


but was denied hence this case. They argued that it
cannot be liable for illegal exaction since both POEA May a person be held liable for violation of an
Memorandum were void for lack of publication or administrative regulation which was not
filed with the National Administrative Register, as published?
required in Book VII, Chapter 2, Sec. 3 of the Admin
Code of 1987. Held: Petitioner insists, however, that it cannot be
held liable for illegal exaction as POEA Memorandum
Respondent Sec. of Laborend Employment argued Circular No. II, Series of 1983, which enumerated the
through the Solicitor General that the questioned allowable fees which may be collected from
administrative circular is not among those requiring applicants, is void for lack of publication.
publication contemplated by Taada vs. Tuvera as it
is addressed only to a specific group of persons and There is merit in the argument.
not to the general public.
In Tanada v. Tuvera (136 SCRA 27 [1985]), the
ISSUE: Court held, as follows:

Whether the POEA Memorandum orders were void We hold therefore that all statutes, including those
for lack of publication of local application and private laws, shall be
published as a condition for their effectivity, which
RULING: shall begin fifteen days after publication unless a
different effectivity date is fixed by the legislature.
Yes, both were void for lack of publication or filed
with the National Administrative Register. Covered by this rule are presidential decrees and
executive orders promulgated by the President in the
POEA Memorandum Circular No. 11, Series of 1983 exercise of legislative powers whenever the same are
was declared void for lack of publication since it is validly delegated by the legislature or, at present,
not internal in nature nor merely regulating only the directly conferred by the Constitution. Administrative
personnel of the POEA. rules and regulations must also be published if their
purpose is to enforce or implement existing law
Likewise, POEA Memorandum Order No. 2, Series of pursuant to a valid delegation.
1983 was also void for lack of publication or filing
with the National Administrative Register since its Interpretative regulations and those merely internal
purpose is to enforce and implement an existing law in nature, that is, regulating only the personnel of
pursuant to a valid delegation. The defense of the the administrative agency and the public, need not
Page | 17
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

be published. Neither is publication required of the valid delegation (Philippine International Trading
so-called letter of instructions issued by the Corporation v. Angeles, supra.). Considering that
administrative superiors concerning the rules or POEA Administrative Circular No. 2, Series of 1983
guidelines to be followed by their subordinates in the has not as yet been published or filed with the
performance of their duties. National Administrative Register, the same is
ineffective and may not be enforced.
Applying this doctrine, we have previously declared
as having no force and effect the following Does the publication requirement apply as
administrative issuances: a) Rules and Regulations well to administrative regulations addressed
issued by the Joint Ministry of Health-Ministry of only to a specific group and not to the general
Labor and Employment Accreditation Committee public?
regarding the accreditation of hospitals, medical
clinics and laboratories (Joint Ministry of Health- Held: The Office of the Solicitor General likewise
Ministry of Labor and Employment Accreditation argues that the questioned administrative circular is
Committee v. Court of Appeals, 196 SCRA 263 not among those requiring publication contemplated
[1991]); b) Letter of Instruction No. 416 ordering the by Tanada v. Tuvera as it is addressed only to a
suspension of payments due and payable by specific group of persons and not to the general
distressed copper mining companies to the national public.
government (Caltex Philippines, Inc. v. Court of Again, there is no merit in this argument.
Appeals, 208 SCRA 726 [1992]); c) Memorandum
Circulars issued by the POEA regulating the The fact that the said circular is addressed only to a
recruitment of domestic helpers to Hong Kong (Phil. specified group, namely private employment
Association of Service Exporters v. Torres, 212 SCRA agencies or authority holders, does not take it away
298 [1992]); d) Administrative Order No. SOCPEC from the ambit of our ruling in Tanada v. Tuvera. In
89-08-01 issued by the Philippine International the case of Phil. Association of Service Exporters v.
Trading Corporation regulating applications for Torres ((212 SCRA 298 [1992]), the administrative
importation from the Peoples Republic of China circulars questioned therein were addressed to an
(Philippine International Trading Corporation v. even smaller group, namely Philippine and Hong
Angeles, 263 SCRA 421 [1996]); and e) Corporate Kong agencies engaged in the recruitment of
Compensation Circular No. 10 issued by the workers for Hong Kong, and still the Court ruled
Department of Budget and Management therein that, for lack of proper publication, the said
discontinuing the payment of other allowances and circulars may not be enforced or implemented.
fringe benefits to government officials and
employees (De Jesus v. Commission on Audit, 294 Our pronouncement in Tanada v. Tuvera is clear and
SCRA 152 [1998). In all these cited cases, the categorical. Administrative rules and regulations
administrative issuances questioned therein were must be published if their purpose is to enforce or
uniformly struck down as they were not published or implement existing law pursuant to a valid
filed with the National Administrative Register as delegation. The only exceptions are interpretative
required by the Administrative Code of 1987 regulations, those merely internal in nature, or those
(Administrative Code of 1987, Book VII, chapter 2, so-called letters of instructions issued by
Section 3). administrative superiors concerning the rules and
POEA memorandum Circular No. 2, Series of 1983 guidelines to be followed by their subordinates in the
must likewise be declared ineffective as the same performance of their duties. Administrative Circular
was never published or filed with the National No. 2, Series of 1983 has not been shown to fall
Administrative Register. under any of these exceptions.

POEA Memorandum Circular No. 2, Series of 1983 In this regard, the Solicitor Generals reliance on the
provides for the applicable schedule of placement case of Yaokasin v. Commissioner of Customs (180
and documentation fees for private employment SCRA 599 [1989]) is misplaced. In the said case, the
agencies or authority holders. Under the said Order, validity of certain Customs Memorandum Orders
the maximum amount which may be collected from were upheld despite their lack of publication as they
prospective Filipino overseas workers is P2,500.00. were addressed to a particular class of persons, the
The said circular was apparently issued in customs collectors, who were also the subordinates
compliance with the provisions of Article 32 of the of the Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs. As
Labor Code x x x. such, the said Memorandum Orders clearly fall under
one of the exceptions to the publication requirement,
It is thus clear that the administrative circular under namely those dealing with instructions from an
consideration is one of those issuances which should administrative superior to a subordinate regarding
be published for its effectivity, since its purpose is to the performance of their duties, a circumstance
enforce and implement an existing law pursuant to a which does not obtain in the case at bench.
Page | 18
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

prohibition and damages against Comelec and all its


To summarize, petitioner should be absolved from Commisioners. Photokina alleged the refusal of
the three (3) counts of exaction as POEA Comelec and the Commissioners to formalize the
Administrative Circular No. 2, Series of 1983 could contract; that Chairman Benipayo on his statement
not be the basis of administrative sanctions against committed grave abuse of discretion; and that
petitioner for lack of publication. Comelec failed to perform its duty under the contract
incurring damages on the part of Photokina.
ADMIN REGULATION FOR INTERNAL (need Respondent Judge Quijano-Padilla issued a
not be published) Resolution granting Photokinas application for a writ
of prohibitory injunction. Comelec thru Solicitor
MAY THE WINNING BIDDER COMPEL THE General filed a motion but was denied by respondent
GOVERNMENT? Judge. Hence, a petition for certiorari was elevated
directly to Supreme Court by the OSG in behalf of
Comelec.
(See case COMELEC v. Quijano-Padilla)
ISSUE:

Whether Photokina can compel Comelec, a


COMELEC vs. Quijano-Padilla government agency, to formalize a contact
G.R. No. 151992, September 18, 2002 notwithstanding that its bid exceeds the amount
appropriated by Congress for the project?
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.:
RULING:
FACTS:
NO. The court reiterated that, No contract
Voters Registration Act of 1996 (RA No. 8189) was involving the expenditure of public funds by
passed, pursuant to that the Comelec promulgated a any government agency shall be entered into
Resolution approving in the principle the Voters or authorized unless the proper accounting
Registration and Identification System Project (VRIS) official of the agency concerned shall have a
which envisions a computerized database system for certified to the officer entering into obligation
May 2004 Elections with an aim of tamper-proof and that funds have been duly appropriated for the
counterfeit-resistant voters identification card. purpose and that the amount cover the
Comelec then issued pre-qualify and bid for the proposed contract for the current calendar
supply and installations of IT equipment and ancillary year is available for expenditure on account
services for VRIS Project. thereof, subject to verification of the auditor.
(Sec 7, Administrative Code of 1987)
Photokina Corporation pre-qualified and allowed to
participate as one of the bidders. After public bidding The court ruled that, Photokina cannot accede to its
was conducted, Photokina garnered the highest contention that there is already a perfected contract
score and was declared the winning bidder, on which since existence of appropriations and availability of
a resolution was issued by Comelec for the approval funds are indispensable pre-requisites to or
of such, and was immediately accepted by conditions sine qua non for the execution of
Photokina, parties then initially proceeded to government contracts. To hold otherwise is to allow
formalize the contract with Comm. Sadain. a public officer to execute a binding contract that
would obligate the government in an amount in
However, under budget appropriation passed by excess of the appropriations for the purpose for
Congress for the said project was only 1 billion pesos, which the contract was attempted to be made, which
on which the actual fund budget for the project was the court found as a dangerous precedent.
1.2 bilion. For such disparity, the execution of the
contract was of no avail, irregardless of the Even the draft contract submitted by Commissioner
expiration of office of then oppositorComelec Sadain that provides for a 1.2 Bilion pesos is
Chairman Demetriou and despite several unacceptable, of which the court share sentiment
notifications by Photokina. with then Chairman Demetriou that it circumvents
the statutory requirements on government contracts.
Then incumbent Chairman Benipayo, through press Hence, petitioners are justified in refusing to
releases and public announcements, announced that formalize the contract with Photokina, as prudence
the VRIS Project has been set aside, and plan of re- dictates them not to enter into a contract not backed
engineering the entire modernization program of the up by sufficient appropriation and available funds.
Comelec. Photokina, with the adverse turn of events,
filed with RTC Quezon City a petition for mandamus,
Page | 19
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

NOTE: SIMON JR. VS. CHR


GR NO. 100150, JANUARY 5, 1994
What is the remedy available to a party who
contracts with the government contrary to the VITUG, J.:
requirements of the law and, therefore, void
ab initio? FACTS:
Held: Of course, we are not saying that the party
A Demolition Notice was signed by Carlos Quimpoin
who contracts with the government has no other
recourse in law. The law itself affords him the his capacity as an Executive Officer of the Quezon
remedy. Section 48 of E.O. No. 292 explicitly City Integrated Hawkers Management Council under
provides that any contract entered into contrary to the Office of the City Mayor. This Notice was sent to
the above-mentioned requirements shall be void, the private respondents, the members and officers
and the officers entering into the contract shall be of the North EDSA Vendors Association,
liable to the Government or other contracting party Incorporated. The Notice of Demolition was for the
for any consequent damage to the same as if the removal of private respondents stalls, sari-sari
transaction had been wholly between private stores and carinderia to give way to the Peoples
parties. So when the contracting officer transcends Park.
his lawful and legitimate powers by acting in excess
of or beyond the limits of his contracting authority,
On July 12, 1990, the group of vendors led by their
the Government is not bound under the contract. It
President Roque Fermo filed a letter-complaint
would be as if the contract in such case were a
(Pinagsamang Sinumpaang Salaysay) with the CHR
private one, whereupon, he binds himself, and thus,
assumes personal liability thereunder. (Fernandez, a against the petitioners, asking the CHR Chairman
Treatise on Government Contracts Under Philippine Mary Concepcion Bautista for a letter to be
Law, 2001, supra., pp. 22-23). Otherwise stated, the addressed to then Mayor Brigido Simon Jr. of Quezon
proposed contract is unenforceable as to the City to stop the demolition.
Government.
CHR in its Resolution ordered the disbursement of
While this is not the proceeding to determine where financial assistance of not more than 200,000 in
the culpability lies, however, the constitutional favor of the private respondents and directed the
mandate cited above constrains us to remind all petitioners to desist from further demolition with the
public officers that public office is a public trust and warning that violation of said order would lead to a
all public officers must at all times be accountable to
citation for contempt and arrest.
the people. The authority of public officers to enter
into government contracts is circumscribed with a
heavy burden of responsibility. In the exercise of Petitioners questioned the jurisdiction of CHR and
their contracting prerogative, they should be the first moved for the dismissal of the CHR case. CHR cited
judges of the legality, propriety and wisdom of the petitioners in contempt for carrying out the
contract they entered into. They must exercise a high demolition despite the order to desist and imposes a
degree of caution so that the Government may not fine of 500.00 on each of them.
be the victim of ill-advised or improvident action
(Rivera v. Maclang, 7 SCRA 57 [1963]). The motion to dismiss filed by petitioners to CHR was
denied and the motion for reconsideration was also
dismissed.
ON QUESTIONS:
Hence, this case.
CAN THE CHR issue a TRO? = YES
DOES IT HAVE CONTEMPT POWER? = YES ISSUE:
DOES THE CHR have adjudicatory power? =
NO 1. Whether CHR has Jurisdiction over the case
and whether they have an adjudicatory
See Case of Simon Jr. power.
2. Whether CHR has the power to issue TRO.
3. Whether CHR has contempt power.

Page | 20
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

RULING: from the proper courts on behalf of the victims of


human rights violations. Not being a court of justice,
1. NO. In its Order x x x denying petitioners motion the CHR itself has no jurisdiction to issue the writ,
to dismiss, the CHR theorizes that the intention of for a writ of preliminary injunction may only be
the members of the Constitutional Commission is to issued by the judge of any court in which the action
make CHR a quasi-judicial body. This view, however, is pending [within his district], or by a Justice of the
has not heretofore been shared by this Court. In Court of Appeals, or of the Supreme Court. x x x. A
Carino v. Commission on Human Rights (204 SCRA writ of preliminary injunction is an ancillary remedy.
483, 492), the Court x x x has observed that it is It is available only in a pending principal action, for
only the first of the enumerated powers and the preservation or protection of the rights and
functions that bears any resemblance to adjudication interest of a party thereto, and for no other
of adjudgment, but that resemblance can in no way purpose.
be synonymous to the adjudicatory power itself. The
Court explained: The Commission does have legal standing to indorse,
for appropriate action, its findings and
x x x [T]he Commission on Human Rights x x x was recommendations to any appropriate agency of
not meant by the fundamental law to be another government (See Export Processing Zone Authority
court or quasi-judicial agency in this country, or v. Commission on Human Rights, 208 SCRA 125).
duplicate much less take over the functions of the
3. YES. On its contempt powers, the CHR is
latter. The most that may be conceded to the
constitutionally authorized to adopt its operational
Commission in the way of adjudicative power is that
guidelines and rules of procedure, and cite for
it may investigate, i.e., receive evidence and make contempt for violations thereof in accordance with
findings of fact as regards claimed human rights the Rules of Court. Accordingly, the CHR acted
violations involving civil and political rights. But fact within its authority in providing in its revised rules,
finding is not adjudication, and cannot be likened to its power to cite or hold any person in direct or
the judicial function of a court of justice, or even a indirect contempt, and to impose the appropriate
quasi-judicial agency or official. The function of penalties in accordance with the procedure and
receiving evidence and ascertaining therefrom the sanctions provided for in the Rules of Court. That
facts of a controversy is not a judicial function, power to cite for contempt, however, should be
properly speaking. To be considered such, the understood to apply only to violations of its adopted
faculty of receiving evidence and making factual operational guidelines and rules of procedure
essential to carry out its investigatorial powers. To
conclusions in a controversy must be accompanied
exemplify, the power to cite for contempt could be
by the authority of applying the law to those factual
exercised against persons who refuse to cooperate
conclusions to the end that the controversy may be
with the said body, or who unduly withhold relevant
decided or determined authoritatively, finally and information, or who decline to honor summons, and
definitively, subject to such appeals or modes of the like, in pursuing its investigative work. The order
review as may be provided by law. This function, to to desist (a semantic interplay for a restraining
repeat, the Commission does not have. order) in the instance before us, however, is not
investigatorial in character but prescinds from an
2. YES. In Export Processing Zone Authority v. adjudicative power that it does not possess.
Commission on Human rights (208 SCRA 125, 131),
the Court x x x explained:

The constitutional provision directing the CHR to


provide for preventive measures and legal aid
services to the underprivileged whose human rights
have been violated or need protection may not be
construed to confer jurisdiction on the Commission
to issue a restraining order or writ of injunction for,
if that were the intention, the Constitution would
have expressly said so. Jurisdiction is conferred only
by the Constitution or by law. It is never derived by
implication.

Evidently, the preventive measures and legal aid


services mentioned in the Constitution refer to
extrajudicial and judicial remedies (including a writ
of preliminary injunction) which the CHR may seek
Page | 21
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

ADDITIONAL CASES FOR ADMIN LAW RULING:

ON JURISDICTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE NO.


BODIES
Section 1 of PD 1344 gives the National Housing
Authority (NHA) now HLURB, the exclusive
ESTATE DEVELOPERS AND INVESTORS jurisdiction to hear and decide certain cases as
CORPORATION v. CA, ROSALIE OROPESA follows:
and/or NESTOR OROPESA
G.R. No. 92461. September 2, 1992 "SECTION 1. In the exercise of its function to
regulate the real estate trade and business and in
addition to its powers provided for in Presidential
NOCON, J.: Decree No. 957, the National Housing Authority shall
have exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide cases
FACTS: of the following nature:

On May 23, 1988, petitioner, who is the developer of A. Unsound real estate business practices:
a subdivision in Antipolo, filed a complaint before B. Claims involving refund and any other claims filed
RTC of Manila for collection of the amount due under by subdivision lot or condominium unit buyer against
a promissory note executed by respondents the project owner, developer, dealer, broker or
representing the unpaid balance of the purchase salesman; and
price of a lot bought by the latter from the former. C. Cases involving specific performance of
contractual and statutory obligations filed by buyers
Respondents refused to pay the balance of the of subdivision lot or condominium unit against the
purchase price of the subdivision lot due to owner, developer, dealer, broker or salesman."
petitioners abandonment of its undertaking to fully
develop the Antipolo Hills Subdivision. The constitutionality of such grant of exclusive
jurisdiction to the National Housing Authority (now
This lead to respondents and other buyers to form HLURB) over cases involving the sale of commercial
the Antipolo Hills Homeowners Association in order subdivisions was upheld in Tropical Homes case.
that they may better be heard by petitioner.
A close scrutiny of the complaint discloses that the
The Association filed a complaint against petitioner promissory note upon which the collection suit is
before the HLURB, pursuant to its exclusive predicated, merely schedules the amortization of the
jurisdiction as provided under P.D. 957, for non- balance or unpaid portion of the purchase price of
development of the Antipolo Hills Subdivision and the house and lot. What appellant is collecting
prayed that petitioner be restrained from collecting involves the "sales of lots in commercial
the monthly amortization of the homeowners, to take subdivisions," which per the Tropical Homes case
over the development of the Antipolo Hills jurisdiction lies with the HLURB, and not with the civil
Subdivision and to allow respondents to directly courts.
make their payment of monthly amortizations with
the HLURB which the latter granted. Petitioner The contention of the petitioner that HLURB has no
appealed the decision to the same board but the jurisdiction because what the law provides is that it
latter sustained the decision. may take over only those cases filed by the lot buyers
against the developer and not vice versa is
On the other hand, the petition filed by petitioner in untenable. The exclusive jurisdiction vested in the
RTC Manila was granted. NHA is broad and general to regulate the real
estate trade and business in accordance with the
ISSUE: provisions of said law. As clarified in PD 1344, such
exclusive jurisdiction includes jurisdiction to hear and
Whether RTC and not the HLURB has the jurisdiction decide cases involving unsound real estate business
to hear and determine cases filed by developer to lot practices (Sec. 1 [A]) as well as claims for refund
buyers as the mentioned cause of action did not fall and complaints for specific performance filed by the
under HLURBs jurisdiction. buyer (paragraphs B&C) of PD 1344."

Page | 22
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

ON DUE PROCESS The SC also outlined that administrative bodies, like


the CIR, although not strictly bound by the Rules of
ANG TIBAY, represented by TORIBIO Court must also make sure that they comply to the
TEODORO, manager and propietor, and requirements of due process. For administrative
NATIONAL WORKERS BROTHERHOOD vs. bodies, due process can be complied with by
THE COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS and observing the following:
NATIONAL LABOR UNION, INC., (1) The right to a hearing which includes the right
G.R. No. L-46496. February 27, 1940 of the party interested or affected to present his
own case and submit evidence in support
LAUREL, J.: thereof.

FACTS: (2) Not only must the party be given an


opportunity to present his case and to adduce
Teodoro Toribio owns and operates Ang Tibay, a evidence tending to establish the rights which he
leather company which supplies the Philippine Army. asserts but the tribunal must consider the evidence
Due to alleged shortage of leather, Toribio caused presented.
the layoff of a number of his employees. However,
the National Labor Union, Inc. (NLU) questioned the (3) While the duty to deliberate does not impose
validity of said lay off as it averred that the said the obligation to decide right, it does imply a
employees laid off were members of NLU while no necessity which cannot be disregarded, namely, that
members of the rival labor union (National Workers of having something to support its decision. A
Brotherhood) were laid off. NLU claims that NWB is decision with absolutely nothing to support it is a
a company dominated union and Toribio was merely nullity, a place when directly attached.
busting NLU.
(4) Not only must there be some evidence to
The case reached the Court of Industrial Relations
support a finding or conclusion but the evidence
(CIR) where Toribio and NWB won. Eventually, NLU
must be substantial. Substantial evidence is more
went to the Supreme Court invoking its right for a
than a mere scintilla It means such relevant evidence
new trial on the ground of newly discovered
as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
evidence. The Supreme Court agreed with NLU. The
support a conclusion.
Solicitor General, arguing for the CIR, filed a motion
for reconsideration.
(5) The decision must be rendered on the
evidence presented at the hearing, or at least
ISSUE: contained in the record and disclosed to the parties
affected.
Whether or not the National Labor Union, Inc. is
entitled to a new trial for the appreciation of new (6) The administrative body or any of its judges,
evidence considering also that respondents were therefore, must act on its or his own independent
denied due process for laying off employees without consideration of the law and facts of the controversy,
just cause. and not simply accept the views of a subordinate in
arriving at a decision.
RULING:
(7) The administrative body should, in all
Yes. The records show that the newly discovered controversial questions, render its decision in such a
evidence or documents obtained by NLU, which they manner that the parties to the proceeding can know
attached to their petition with the SC, were evidence the various issues involved, and the reasons for the
so inaccessible to them at the time of the trial that decisions rendered. The performance of this duty is
even with the exercise of due diligence they could inseparable from the authority conferred upon it.
not be expected to have obtained them and offered
as evidence in the Court of Industrial Relations. In this case due process requirements are not totally
observed in CIR for the respondents lack evidence
Further, the attached documents and exhibits are of to support their claims which in fact is existing at that
such far-reaching importance and effect that their time. Acquiring the aforementioned evidence, it is
admission would necessarily mean the modification the CIR that has the proper forum and jurisdiction to
and reversal of the judgment rendered (said newly appreciate evidences that would comply the
obtained records include books of business/inventory respondents right to due process.
accounts by Ang Tibay which were not previously
accessible but already existing).

Page | 23
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

EQUITABLE BANKING CORPORATION vs. remained unheeded. On 9 November 1989,


NLRC and RICARDO L. SADAC respondent Sadac filed a complaint for illegal
G.R. No. 102467 June 13, 1997 dismissal with damages against petitioner Bank and
individual members of the Board of Directors thereof.
VITUG, J.: After learning of the filing of the complaint, petitioner
Bank terminated the services of respondent Sadac.
FACTS: Finally, on 10 August 1989, Sadac was removed from
his office.
Petition to go against the decision of NLRC in holding
that Sadac as the VP for the legal department of bank Labor Arbiter rendered decision that Sadacs
a regular employee of the bank. termination was illegal and entitled to reinstatement
and payment of full back wages. NLRC affirmed the
Sadac was appointed VP for the legal department of decision upon appeal by the Bank. Sadac filed for
bank with monthly salary, allowance and Christmas execution of judgment where it gave its computation
bonus, with specific legal tasks to perform for the which amounted to P 6.03 M representing his back
bank. wages and the increases he should have received
during the time he was illegally dismissed. The Bank
Later, nine lawyers of the bank's legal department opposed to Sadacs computation. The Labor Arbiter
addressed a petition-letter to the chairman of the favor Sadacs computation. NLRC, upon appeal by
board of directors accusing Sadac of abusive the bank, reversed the decision. CA reversed the
conduct, inefficiency, mismanagement, decision of NLRC. Hence, this petition.
ineffectiveness and indecisiveness.
ISSUE:
Sadac promptly minifested to file criminal, civil and
administrative chrges against the nine lawyers. Then Whether respondent was dismissed without due
Chairman Morales called the lawyers in attempt to process of law.
resolve the differences, but didn't result positively.
Morales in the board meeting then apprised the RULING:
situation, directors adopted a resolution directing
one of the directors (Banico) to look further into the
Yes. The existence of an employer-employee
matter and determine the best course of action for
relationship, between the bank and private
the bank.
respondent brings the case within the coverage of
the Labor Code. Under the Code, an employee may
Banico after his meetings with the lawyers and be validly dismissed if these requisites are attendant:
exploring various alternatives to solve the crisis, but (1) the dismissal is grounded on any of the causes
failed wrote to the board of directors his findings stated in Article 282 of Labor Code, and (2) the
affirming the charges against Sadac. Morales then employee has been notified in writing and given the
sent Sadac a memorandum informing him of the opportunity to be heard and to defend himself as so
charge, the findings of Banico and the expression of required by Section 2 and Section 5, Rule XIV, Book
the boards' loss of confidence upon him and that V, of the Implementing Rules of the Labor
they advise and awaits for Sadac's resignation. Code.

In reaction to the memorandum, Sadac addressed a Article 282(c) of the Labor Code provides that "willful
letter to Morales with copies furnish to the directors, breach by the employee of the trust reposed in him
stating that the findings of Banico contained libelous by his employer" is a cause for the termination of
statements and the decision of the board will amount employment by an employer. Ordinary breach of
trust will not suffice, it must be willful and without
to illegal dismissal; with request for a full hearing by
justifiable excuse. This ground must be founded on
the directors so he could clear his name.
facts established by the employer who must clearly
and convincingly prove by substantial evidence the
Vice-chairman Romulo answered Sadac that they are facts and incidents upon which loss of confidence in
exercising its managerial prerogative to control, the employee may fairly be made to rest; otherwise,
conduct business in the manner deems fit and to the dismissal will be rendered illegal.
regulate the same.
Confident that no employer-employee existed
In reaction thereto, Sadac requested for a full between the bank and private respondent,
hearing and formal investigation but the same petitioners have put aside the procedural
Page | 24
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

requirements for terminating one's employment, i.e.,


(a) a notice apprising the employee of the particular Alleging that Johnson should not be allowed to
acts or omissions for which his dismissal is sought, expand its business activities "to areas in which it
and (b) another notice informing the employee of the was not licensed and in which it was not actually
employer's decision to dismiss him. Failure to engaged as at the effectivity of Rep. Act Nos. 5186
comply with these requirements taints the dismissal and 5455 without first obtaining from the Board of
with illegality. This procedure is mandatory, any Investments the corresponding certificates of
judgment reached by management without that
authority after prior publication and posting of
compliance can be considered void and
notices, Adamson filed with BOI a petition praying
inexistent. While it is true that the essence of due
process is simply an opportunity to be heard or, as for the preliminary stop and desist in the
applied in administrative proceedings, an opportunity manufacture of the mentioned products.
to explain one's side, meetings in the nature of
consultation and conferences such as the case here, BOI informed Johnson of the petition and require the
however, may not be valid substitutes for the proper latter to answer it. While waiting for the answer of
observance of notice and hearing. Johnson BOI send notice of hearing to the parties. It
is almost 3 days before the date of the scheduled
In this place petitioner believes that the relation hearing when Johnson answer.
between them was not actually within the scope of
an employer employee relationship as required On the day of the hearing the parties are given
under the Labor Code, hence mere termination on opportunity to explain their stands and to even cross-
the ground of loss of confidence is enough. However, examine witnesses and to give attachments and
in this case the court finds that there exist that documents.
relationship and the respondent may be terminated
only upon just cause and with proper notice and
Impatient on the resolution BOI, Adamson filed a
hearing which are not accorded by the respondent.
motion praying that hearings be scheduled for the
reception of evidence for a permanent stop and
ADAMSON & ADAMSON, INC., vs. desist order to Johnson. BOI denied the motion and
HON. AUGUSTO M. AMORES, JOHNSON & release its resolution favoring Johnson.
JOHNSON [PHILIPPINES], INC. and the
BOARD OF INVESTMENTS Adamson filed to RTC of Manila a petition seeking for
G.R. No. L-58292. July 23, 1987 judicial relief.

FERNAN, J.: ISSUE:

FACTS: Whether BOI denied due process to Adamson.

Adamson, a Foreign national corporation (Adamson RULING:


at that time, was not yet a Philippine national as
defined in RA 5186) and a manufacturer of hygienic No. While administrative tribunals exercising quasi-
and other related products applied for Certificate of judicial powers are free from the rigidity of certain
Authority to BOI in compliance with the Foreign procedural requirements they are bound by law and
Investment Act (RA 5455) requiring foreign national practice to observe the fundamental and essential
corporation to obtain the said certificate in order for requirements of due process in justiciable cases
them to expand their business activities to areas presented before them. However, the standard of
which is within their primary purpose. They need to due process that must be met in administrative
secure the certificate because at that time that the tribunals allows a certain latitude as long as the
two laws mentioned are enacted, they are not yet element of fairness is not ignored. Hence, there is no
actually manufacturing their products. denial of due process where records show that
hearings were held with prior notice to adverse
parties. But even in the absence of previous notice,
Johnson another foreign corporation was also in the
there is no denial of procedural due process as long
same line of business with Adamson.
as the parties are given the opportunity to be heard.
Based on the foregoing, the court rule that petitioner
Sometime in 1979, after it had acquired new was not deprived of its right to procedural due
machineries, Johnson commenced the manufacture process in the BOI. In the first place, it was notified
and marketing of disposable diapers. During the first of the May 14, 1980 hearing. The notice specified
quarter of 1980, it manufactured sanitary feminine that the hearing was on the petition although it also
tampons and absorbent cotton.
Page | 25
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

stated therein with particularity, petitioner's prayer hear and decide inter partes cases. Said objections
for a stop and desist order. Necessarily, it is were overruled by the Director of Patents, hence, the
immaterial that said notice was sent before Johnson present petition for mandamus, to compel The
filed its answer to the petition and there was yet no Director of Patents to personally hear the cases of
joinder of issues considering that the proceeding was petitioners, in lieu of the hearing officers.
before an administrative tribunal where technicalities
that should be observed in a regular court may be ISSUE:
dispensed with.
Whether the petitioner was denied due process by
Secondly, during the hearing, petitioner was given the amendment of the Rules of Practice in Philippine
the opportunity to present its case, including its Patents Office to delegate the authority to determine
prayer for a stop and desist order. As clearly cases.
enunciated in the minutes of the hearing which We
have painstakingly studied and set forth herein to RULING:
determine if any irregularity attended the questioned
BOI proceeding, it was conducted for the purpose of No. It has been held that power-conferred upon an
hearing the arguments and receiving evidence of the administrative agency to which the administration of
parties "to resolve the case expeditiously." Having a statute is entrusted to issue such regulations and
been given the opportunity to put forth its case, orders as may be deemed necessary or proper in
petitioner has only itself, or, better still, its counsel order to carry out its purposes and provisions maybe
and officers who were present therein, to blame for an adequate source of authority to delegate a
its failure to do so. particular function, unless by express provisions of
the Act or by implication it has been withheld. There
Petitioner's right to procedural due process was not is no provision either in Republic Act No. 165 or 166
violated when the hearing was conducted before a negativing the existence of such authority, so far as
director of the BOI and not before the members of the designation of hearing examiners is concerned.
the board themselves who decided the case. The Nor can the absence of such authority be fairly
requirements of a fair hearing do not mandate that inferred from contemporaneous and consistent
the actual taking of testimony or the presentation of Executive interpretation of the Act.
evidence be before the same officer who will make
the decision on the case. It could hardly be expected, in view of the magnitude
of his responsibility, to require him to hear personally
AMERICAN TOBACCO vs. THE DIRECTOR OF each and every case pending in his Office. This would
PATENTS leave him little time to attend to his other duties.
G.R. No. L-26803 October 14, 1975
Thus, it is well-settled that while the power to decide
ANTONIO, J.: resides solely in the administrative agency vested by
law, this does not preclude a delegation of the power
to hold a hearing on the basis of which the decision
FACTS:
of the administrative agency will be
made.
Petitioners challenge the validity of Rule 168 of the
"Revised Rules of Practice before the Philippine The rule that requires an administrative officer to
Patent Office in Trademark Cases" as amended, exercise his own judgment and discretion does not
authorizing the Director of Patents to designate any preclude him from utilizing, as a matter of practical
ranking official of said office to hear "inter administrative procedure, the aid of subordinates to
partes" proceedings. Said Rule likewise provides that investigate and report to him the facts, on the basis
"all judgments determining the merits of the case of which the officer makes his decisions. It is
shall be personally and directly prepared by the sufficient that the judgment and discretion finally
Director and signed by him." This amendment by exercised are those of the officer authorized by law.
the Director of Patents was approved by the
Secretary of Agriculture. Neither does due process of law nor the
In accordance with the amended Rule, the Director requirements of fair hearing require that the actual
of Patents delegated the hearing of petitioners' cases taking of testimony be before the same officer who
to hearing officers, specifically, Attys. Amando will make the decision in the case. As long as a party
Marquez, Teofilo Velasco, Rustico Casia and Hector is not deprived of his right to present his own case
Buenaluz, the other respondents herein. and submit evidence in support thereof, and the
Petitioners filed their objections to the authority of decision is supported by the evidence in the record,
the hearing officers to hear their cases, alleging that there is no question that the requirements of due
the amendment of the Rule is illegal and void process and fair trial are fully met. In short, there is
because under the law the Director must personally
Page | 26
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

no abnegation of responsibility on the part of the conducted, alleging that with the filing of the
officer concerned as the actual decision remains with complaint by the very same acting prosecutor of the
and is made by said officer. It is, however, required Industrial Court who conducted the preliminary
that to "give the substance of a hearing, which is for investigation, the reception of evidence by hearing
the purpose of making determinations upon examiners of the same court, and the adoption by
evidence the officer who makes the determinations Judge Tabigne of the report of Examiner Pedro
must consider and appraise the evidence which Perez, the said Industrial Court assumed the role of
justifies them." accuser, prosecutor and judge at the same time. We
find the objection to be without legal basis. The
In the case at bar, while the hearing officer may procedure followed by the Industrial Court was in
make preliminary rulings on the myriad of questions accordance with section 5(b) of the Industrial Peace
raised at the hearings of these cases, the ultimate Act (Republic Act No. 875), which reads in part as
decision on the merits of all the issues and questions follows:
involved is left to the Director of Patents.
. . . Whenever it is charged by an offended party or
ERLANGER & GALINGER, INC., and L.B. his representative that any person engaged or is
NESTLE vs. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL engaging in any unfair labor practice, the Court or
RELATIONS and EULOGIO P. FLORES any agency or agent designated by the Court must
G.R. No. L-15118. December 29, 1960 investigate such charge and shall have the power to
issue and cause to be served upon such person a
GUTIERREZ DAVID, J.: complaint stating the charges in that respect and
containing a notice of hearing before the Court or a
member thereof, or before a designated Hearing
FACTS:
Examiner at the time and place fixed therein not less
than five nor more than ten days after serving the
On November 9, 1954, upon charges filed by said complaint.
respondent Eulogio P. Flores, and after preliminary
investigation, a complaint for unfair labor practice Under the above legal provision, it is apparent that
was filed in the Court of Industrial Relations by an the Court of Industrial Relations, in the exercise of
acting prosecutor of that court against Erlanger and its investigatory powers, in unfair labor practice
Galinger, Inc (EGI). The complaint alleged that the cases, may designate its acting prosecutor to
corporation and general manager, thru their officers, conduct an investigation of the charges filed by the
supervisors and agents, initiated and assisted in the aggrieved party, and later have the complaint filed
formation of a labor organization composed of their on the basis of the result of said investigation,
employees and supervisors known as the Kontiki requiring the respondent to file his answer and then
Employees Association and continuously thereafter hear both parties thru designated hearing examiners.
interfered with its administration, supported, Such procedure has been sanctioned by this Court in
controlled and dominated it, thereby violating the case of National Printing Workers vs. Asia Printing,
employees' right to self-organization as provided in et. al. (99 Phil., 589; 52 Off. Gaz., [12] 5858). It is
section 3 of Republic Act 975; that by reason of the true that the prosecutors and hearing examiners are
union activities of Eulogio P. Flores he was officers of the court. Their functions and duties as
summarily and discriminatorily discharged him. such are, however, well-defined in the law and their
Answering the complaint, the herein petitioners, findings are not conclusive upon the Industrial Court,
denied the charge of unfair labor practice and as which has the discretion to accept or reject them.
special defenses alleged that the separation of There is, therefore, no reason to fear that the parties
Eulogio P. Flores was justified, and that the filing of who undergo trial under the procedure as above
the complaint by an acting prosecutor of the stated are denied the constitutional guarantee of due
Industrial Court was violative of the law on due process.
process.
The fact that the decision rendered by the court
ISSUE: based upon the report of Hearing Examiner Perez
who heard the evidence only in part is of no moment,
for the court below studied and examined not only
Whether petitioner EGI was denied due process by
the evidence received by said hearing examiner but
CIR.
also that presented before the others and found that
the findings and conclusions contained in the report
RULING: conform to its own. This court has already ruled, in
the case of Indias vs. Philippine Iron Mines, Inc. (101
No. Petitioners in the first-place question the manner Phil., 297; 54 Off. Gaz., [6] 1817), that "where the
in which the prosecution of the case had been Court of Industrial Relations approved the report of
Page | 27
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

the hearing examiner after a perusal of the record of RULING:


the case, this pre-supposes that it had examined the
evidence and found no justification in modifying his Yes. When the rules and/or rates are meant to apply
findings and conclusions. It is not necessary for the to all enterprises of a given kind throughout the
court to make in the order its own discussion of the Philippines, this may partake of a legislative
evidence or its own findings of fact." character, such is not the nature of the order
complained of. Indeed, the same
VIGAN ELECTRIC LIGHT COMPANY, INC., vs. applies exclusively to petitioner herein. What is
THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION more, it is predicated upon the finding of fact
G.R. No. L-19850. January 30, 1964 based upon a report submitted by the General
Auditing Office that petitioner is making a profit of
CONCEPCION, J.: more than 12% of its invested capital,
which is denied by petitioner. Obviously, the latter is
FACTS: entitled to cross-examine the maker of said report,
and to introduce evidence to disprove the contents
thereof and/or explain or complement the same, as
RA. 316 granted petitioner Vigan Electric Light
well as to refute the conclusion drawn therefrom by
Company, Inc., a franchise to construct, maintain the respondent. In other words, in making said
and operate an electric light, heat and/or power finding of fact, respondent performed a
plant for the purpose of generating and distributing function partaking of a quasi-judicial character the
light, heat and/or power, for sale within the limits of valid exercise of which demands previous notice and
several municipalities of the province of Ilocos Sur. hearing.
Petitioner was also granted certificate of public
convenience by PSC on the scheduled rates the Indeed, sections 16(c) and 20 (a) of Commonwealth
former filed in the latter. Act No. 146, explicitly require notice and hearing
with the PCS when it performs it quasi-judicial
Five years later petitioner received a letter from PCS function.
informing them of an alleged letter-petition from
Since compliance with law must be presumed, it
Congressman Crisologo and 107 residents of Vigan
should be assumed that petitioner's current rates
for alleged sale of 2000 electric meters in black
were fixed by respondent after proper notice and
market by the Avegon Co., as anomalous and illegal.
hearing. Hence, modification of such rates cannot be
They also alleged excessive rates of Petitioner.
made, over petitioner's objection, without such
notice and hearing, particularly considering that the
Petitioner denied all allegations.
factual basis of the action taken by respondent is
assailed by petitioner.
On March 15, 1962, petitioner received a
communication form the General Auditing Office
Whether notice and a hearing in proceedings before
notifying him that one Mr. Cesar A. Damole had
a public service commission are necessary depends
"been instructed to make an audit and examination
chiefly upon statutory or constitutional provisions
of the books and other records of account" of said applicable to such proceedings, which make notice
petitioner, "under the provisions of Commonwealth and hearing, prerequisite to action by the
Act No. 325 and in accordance with the request of commission, and upon the nature and object of such
the Public Service Commission contained in its letter proceedings, that is, whether the proceedings, are,
dated March 12, 1962", and directing petitioner to on the one hand, legislative and rule-making in
cooperate with said Mr. Damole "for the successful character, or are, on the other hand,
accomplishment of his work". determinative and judicial or quasi-judicial, affecting
the rights an property of private or specific persons.
2 days later PCS order the reduction of rates by the As a general rule, a public utility must be afforded
Petitioner and based the reduction on the findings of some opportunity to be heard as to the propriety and
reasonableness of rates fixed for its services by a
Mr. Damole that there is an excess of revenue on the
public service commission. (43 Am. Jur. 716;
petitioner.
Emphasis supplied.)

ISSUE: Wherefore, we hold that the determination of the


issue involved in the order complained of partakes of
Whether petitioners right to due process was denied the nature of a quasi-judicial function and that
by PCS by fixing the rates of the former without having been issued without previous notice and
notice and hearing.
Page | 28
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

hearing said order is clearly violative of the due for the purposes of determining whether the
process clause, and, hence, null and void, applicant could be given a provisional authority to
operate.
ELISEO SILVA vs. THE HONORABLE
FELICIANO OCAMPO, GABRIEL P. PRIETO and As the court held:
QUINTIN PAREDES, JR., in their capacities as
Hearing of a contested application for a permanent
Commissioners of the Public Service
certificate of public convenience before any officer
Commission and BELEN CABRERA
other than a Commissioner of the Public Service
G.R. No. L-5162. January 31, 1952
Commission is null and void under section3 of the
Public Service Act. If a re-hearing of a contested
BAUTISTA ANGELO, J.:
application was ordered by the Supreme Court for a
violation of section 3 of said Act, the applicant has
FACTS:
no alternative but to present evidence de novo,
unless of course, said parties agree at said hearing
Belen Cabrera filed in the Public Service Commission
an application for a certificate of public convenience or hearings to re-submit the evidence already
to install, maintain and operate in the City of Lipa an presented and taken down, with such modifications
ice plant with a 10-ton daily productive capacity and and under such conditions as they may agree upon,
to sell the product of said plant in said city as well as including such other evidence which they may wish
in several municipalities of the province of Batangas. to present. The rationale of the rule is none other
Eliseo Silva opposed the application on the ground than to make the Commission, or any of the
that his ice plant was adequate to meet the needs of Commissioners who may be authorized for this
the public and that public convenience did not purpose, to try the case or, receive the evidence
require the operation of another ice plant. itself, as the law requires, so that it may have the
Commissioner Feliciano Ocampo commissioned necessary opportunity for observation and
Attorney Antonio H. Aspillera, chief of the legal appreciation of the evidence to enable it to reach an
division, to receive the evidence. Based on the
accurate and intelligent conclusion. Mere re-
evidence received by Aspillera, the Commission
submission of the evidence already presented would
granted the application. On appeal, however, the
Supreme Court held that the proceedings had before not meet this compelling objective, the only
Attorney Aspillera were null and void being in exception being when the opposing parties agree to
violation of section 3 of the Public Service Act, as such re-submission. This is a privilege that they can
amended, and set aside the decision of the exercise or waive in the use of their discretion.
Commission and ordered that the case returned for
re-hearing. However, for the purpose of the issuance of a
provisional permit, there being an urgent public need
At the re-hearing of the case Comm. Ocampo allows for the service of applicant, not only by the people of
Belen Cabrera the submission or refiling of evidence the vicinity but also of the neighboring towns,
presented at the hearing before Comm. Aspillera as although the evidence presented by the applicant
well evidence de novo which petitioner opposed
has been admitted in violation of Sec. 3 of said Act
because it will be a contradiction to the ruling of the
on a directive of the Supreme Court, such evidence
SC that they may refile evidence presented before if
may serve as justification, if the Commission so finds
the same was agreed by the parties.
it, to warrant the issuance of a provisional permit.
ISSUE:
The Public Service Commission has power to grant
Whether Comm. Ocampo erred in ordering the temporary or provisional permit when the purpose of
resubmission of the previous evidence and whether the permit is to meet an urgent public necessity.
PSC has the authority to issue provisional permit to
operate.

RULING:

Yes and Yes. In this case the court agreed that


Comm. Ocampo erred in ruling the resubmission of
the evidence presented before Atty. Aspillera as it
would negate the very essence of Re-hearing the
case. However, they ruled and they found out that
the evidence was actually used by the Commission
Page | 29
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

FORTUNATO F. HALILI vs. PUBLIC SERVICE thereto, is clearly a deprivation of a precious right
COMMISSION and CAM TRANSIT CO., INC., and privilege without due process of law.
G.R. No. L-5948. April 29, 1953 ."Due process of law, or, in the mean accord with the
procedure outlines in the law, or, in the absence of
LABRADOR, J.: express procedure, under such safeguards for the
protection of individual rights as the settled maxims
of law permit and sanction for the particular class of
FACTS:
cases to which the one in question belongs," (16
C.J.S., 1141.) In the case at bar, the Public Service
Petitioner herein is the holder of various certificates Act does not include the amendment made in the
of public convenience to operate auto-truck services disputed order among those may be ordered without
between Balara and various points in the city of notice or hearing in accordance with Section 17 of
Manila and its suburbs. Respondent CAM Transit Co., the Act. Is the amendment, without notice or
Inc., also holds a certificate of public convenience to hearing, permitted by the well settled maxims of
operate a line of trucks between Balara and City Hall, law? We declare it is not, because due process of law
Manila. This certificate was obtained by it through guarantees notices and opportunity to be heard to
assignment, with the approval of the Public Service persons who would be affected by the order or act
Commission, from Benjamin Encarnacion. One of the contemplated.
original lines granted to Benjamin Encarnacion. now
It is therefore hold that the amendment authorized
operated by the respondent CAM Transit Co., Inc., is
by the order of the respondent Commission of July
the Balara-City Hall (Manila), via Kamuning line,
3,1952, is not authorized by the facts contained in
starting at Balara fifter plant, passing through
the decision granting the certificate of public
Barangka road, Marikina-San Juan road, Highway 54, convenience in favor of the predecessor in interest
Kamuning road, etc of the respondent operator, and that even if there
was really an error in the original decision fixing the
On July 2, 1952, CAM Transit Co., Inc., filed a route , in that the said routes were not in accordance
petition with the respondent Commission, alleging with the evidence submitted, the issuance of the
that the route authorized in its City Hall (Manila)- order without proper notice to the petitioner and
Balara line, and passing along the Marikina-Barangka opportunity on the part of the latter to be heard in
road, Marikina-San Juan road, and Highway 54, is relation to the petition, is a violation of the
entirely different from that supported by the petitioner's right not be deprived of his property
evidence presented in the hearing, and praying that without due process of law.
the certificate be amended so that the route
authorized should be along Highway 54, Silagan LIANGA BAY LOGGING, CO., INC., vs. HON.
Avenue, U.P. site, ending at Balara, instead of MANUEL LOPEZ ENAGE, and AGO TIMBER
Highway 54, Marikina San Juan road, Barangka road, CORPORATION
ending at Balara. Acting upon this petition, the G.R. No. L-30637. July 16, 1987
respondent Commission on the following day, July 3,
1952, and without a previous notice to the petitioner
TEEHANKEE, C.J.:
or a previous hearing thereon, ordered the
modification of the line in accordance with the
petition. FACTS:

ISSUE: The parties herein are both forest concessionaries


whose licensed areas are adjacent to each other.
Whether the order for amendment of the route, Since the concessions of petitioner and respondent
without notice to the petitioner or hearing in which are adjacent to each other, they have a common
the latter may be given opportunity to be present, boundary-the Agusan-Surigao Provincial boundary-
was lawfully and validly issued by the Commission. whereby the eastern boundary of respondent Ago's
concession is petitioner Lianga's western boundary.
RULING: Because of reports of encroachment by both parties
on each other's concession areas, the Director of
No. The amendment of the respondent operator's Forestry ordered a survey to establish on the ground
lines affects the rights granted and guaranteed by the common boundary of their respective concession
the certificate of public convenience of the petitioner. areas. Forester Cipriano Melchor undertook the
To allow the respondent Commission to authorize the survey and fixed their common boundaries which
amendment, without giving the petitioner respondent Ago protested claiming that "its eastern
opportunity to be heard and express his objections boundary should be the provincial boundary line of
Agusan-Surigao as described in Section 1 of Art.
Page | 30
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

1693 of the Philippine Commission as indicated in the court to consider and weigh again the evidence
green pencil in the attached sketch" of the areas as already presented and passed upon by said officials
prepared by the Bureau of Forestry. However, upon would be to allow it to substitute its judgment for
reviewing the documents (license control maps) of that of said officials who are in a better position to
the boundaries, and considering the evidence consider and weigh the same in the light of the
presented, the Director of Forestry ruled that "the authority specifically vested in them by law. Such a
claim of the Ago Timber Corporation runs counter to posture cannot be entertained, for it is a well-settled
the intentions of this Office is granting the license of doctrine that the courts of justice will generally not
Mr. Narciso Lansang; and further, that it also runs interfere with purely administrative matters which
counter to the intentions of this Office in granting the are addressed to the sound discretion of government
Timber License Agreement to the Lianga Bay agencies and their expertise unless there is a clear
Logging Co., Inc. The intentions of this Office in showing that the latter acted arbitrarily or with grave
granting the two licenses (Lansang and Lianga Bay abuse of discretion or when they have acted in a
Logging Co., Inc.) are patently manifest in capricious and whimsical manner such that their
that distances and bearings are the controlling action may amount to an excess or lack of
factors. Hence, they denied the claims of Ago. jurisdiction.

A motion for reconsideration was filed but the same A doctrine long recognized is that where the law
denied. Ago also elevated the matter to the Office of confines in an administrative office the power to
the president which denied the same. Hence Ago determine particular questions or matters, upon the
filed a petition seeking judicial remedy in RTC of facts to be presented, the jurisdiction of such office
Agusan for the determination of correct boundaries. shall prevail over the courts. The general rule, under
RTC ruled in favor of Ago. the principles of administrative law in force in this
jurisdiction, is that decisions of administrative
ISSUE: officers shall not be disturbed by the courts, except
when the former have acted without or in excess of
Whether the judge is correct in taking cognizance of their jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion.
the case excercising Judicial review. Findings of administrative officials and agencies who
have acquired expertise because their jurisdiction is
RULING: confined to specific matters are generally accorded
not only respect but at times even finality of such
No in this particular case. Respondent Judge findings is supported by substantial evidence. As
erred in taking cognizance of the complaint filed by recently stressed by the Court, "in this era of clogged
respondent Ago, asking for the determination anew court dockets, the need for specialized administrative
of the correct boundary line of its licensed timber boards or commissions with the special knowledge,
area, for the same issue had already been experience and capability to hear and determine
determined by the Director of Forestry, the Secretary promptly disputes on technical matters or essentially
of Agriculture and Natural Resources and the Office factual matters, subject to judicial review in case of
of the President, administrative officials under whose grave abuse of discretion, has become well-nigh
jurisdictions the matter properly belongs. Section indispensable.
1816 of the Revised Administrative Code vests in the
Bureau of Forestry, the jurisdiction and authority JUANITO A. ROSARIO vs. THE HON. COURT
over the demarcation, protection, management, OF APPEALS, and ALEJANDRO CRUZ
reproduction, reforestation, occupancy, and use of G.R. No. 89554 July 10, 1992
all public forests and forest reserves and over the
granting of licenses for game and fish, and for the GRIO-AQUINO, J.:
taking of forest products, including stone and earth
therefrom. The Secretary of Agriculture and Natural
FACTS:
Resources, as department head, may repeal or
modify the decision of the Director of Forestry when
advisable in the public interests, whose decision is in This is a petition for review of the decision of the
turn appealable to the Office of the President. Court of Appeals affirming the dismissing his action
to annul and set aside the City Tenants' Security
Courts of justice devoid of jurisdiction to take Commission's Resolution No. 018-78, revoking the
cognizance of purely administrative matters. In award to him of Lot 3, being a portion of Lot 3, Block
giving due course to the complaint below, the 3 of the former Teresa Estate II in Sampaloc, Manila,
respondent court would necessarily have to assess and awarding it to the protestant, private respondent
and evaluate anew all the evidence presented in the Alejandro Cruz.
administrative proceedings, which is beyond its
competence and jurisdiction. For the respondent
Page | 31
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

Pursuant to its "Land for the Landless Program," the Failure to exhaust administrative remedies is not,
City of Manila, through its City Tenants' Security however, necessarily fatal to an action. Thus, did we
Commission, undertook to subdivide and award rule in Soto vs. Jareno, 144 SCRA 116:
parcels of land of the former Teresa Estate II, in
Sampaloc, Manila, to the occupants thereof. Lot 3, Failure to observe the doctrine of exhaustion of
Block 3 was subdivided into three lots. administrative remedies does not affect the
jurisdiction of the court. The only effect of non-
In 1958, private respondent Alejandro Cruz, who was compliance with this rule is that it will deprive the
the original lessee of the area, subsequently, complainant of a cause of action, which is a ground
constructed a residential house thereon. In the same for a motion to dismiss. If not invoked at the proper
year, he sublet his house on Lot 3-A to the petitioner. time, this ground is deemed waived and the court
can then take cognizance of the case and try it.
Availing of the City's "Land for the Landless It does not appear in this case that a motion to
Program," both parties filed with the City Tenants' dismiss based on non-exhaustion of administrative
Security Commission, their applications to purchase remedies had been filed. We therefore feel, as we
Lots 3-A and 3-C. On June 24, 1977, Lot 3-A was did in a number of cases before this, that "where the
awarded to Rosario while Lot 3-C was awarded to equities warrant such extraordinary recourse," the
Cruz. petition may be given due course.

Not satisfied with just Lot 3-C, Cruz opposed the Interpreting Section 1 of Commonwealth Act No. 539
award of Lot 3-A to Rosario on the ground that, as a (after which the City Tenants' Security Commission
mere lessee of Cruz's house, and not a house owner- was modelled) this Court in Santiago, et al. vs. Cruz,
applicant. et al. (98 Phil. 168, 169) stressed that "the
intendment of the law is to award the lots to those
After conducting an investigation, the City Tenants' who may apply in the order mentioned" that is, the
Security Commission issued a Resolution No. 018-78 "first choice is given to the bona fide'tenants,' the
dated December 8, 1978 revoking the award of Lot second to the 'occupants' and the last to 'private
3-A to Rosario and awarding it to Cruz individuals.

the Regional Trial Court dismissed the complaint on WHEREFORE, the decision of respondent court in CA-
the ground that plaintiff had not been denied G.R. SP No. 16755 is hereby REVERSED and SET
procedural due process, and that he failed to exhaust ASIDE. The award of Lot No. 3-A, Block 3 to the
administrative remedies for he should have appealed private respondent, Alejandro Cruz, by the City
the resolution of the City Tenants' Security Tenants' Security Commission under its Resolution is
Commission to the Office of the President before annulled and set aside. Petitioner Juanito A. Rosario
seeking a judicial review thereof. As no appeal had is declared to have a preferential right to purchase
been taken in due time, the resolution became final Lot No. 3-A, and the City Tenants' Security
and executory. Commission is ordered to award the sale thereof to
him.
ISSUE:
Petitioner Rosario may either reimburse respondent
Whether court may dismiss the case on the ground for one-half of the value of the part of Cruz's house
of non-exhaustion of administrative remedies. situated on Lot 3-A and occupied by petitioner, or
(Whether the doctrine is jurisdictional) allow Cruz to remove his house at his own expense.
If petitioner exercises the first option, the value of
RULING: the improvement shall be determined by a
committee composed of the parties or their
No. Unfortunately, both the trial court and the Court authorized representatives, and a representative of
of Appeals skirted that legal issue and simply the trial court.
dismissed Rosario's petition for review of the
Resolution of the City Tenants' Security Commission
on the grounds of non-exhaustion of administrative
remedies and tardiness.

Page | 32
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

JOSE T. VIDUYA, as collector of Customs of


the Port of Manila vs. EDUARDO BERDIAGO RULING:
alias EDUARDO BERTIAGO; and HON.
ANDRES REYES, as Presiding Judge of Branch The Court opined that except in the case of the
VI, Court of First Instance of Rizal search of a dwelling house, persons exercising police
G.R. No. L-29218 October 29, 1976 authority under the customs law may effect search
and seizure without a search warrant in the
FERNANDO, J.: enforcement of customs laws. There is justification
then for the insistence on the part of private
Except in the case of the search of a dwelling house, respondent that probable cause be shown. So
persons exercising police authority under the respondent Judge found in issuing the search
customs law may affect search and seizure without warrant.
a search warrant in the enforcement of customs
laws. Apparently, he was persuaded to quash it when he
noted that the warrant for seizure and detention
FACTS: came later than its issuance. In thus acting,
respondent Judge apparently overlooked that long
Respondent Berdiago is the owner of a Rolls Royce before the search warrant was applied for, to be
car, Model 1966, which arrived in the Port of Manila specific on April 15, 1968, the misdeclaration and
on January 8, 1968. However, the petitioner, Jose underpayment was already noted and that thereafter
Viduya, then Collector of Customs of Manila, on April 24, 1968, private respondent himself agreed
obtained reliable intelligence that fraudulent to make good the further amount due but not in the
documents were used by Berdiago in securing the sum demanded.
release of the car from the Bureau of Customs,
making it appear therein that the car was a 1961 As the car was kept in a dwelling house, petitioner
model instead of a 1966 one, thus enabling through two of his officers in the Customs Police
respondent to pay a much lower customs duty. Service applied for and was able to obtain the search
warrant. Had there been no such move on the part
There was, accordingly, a formal demand for the of petitioner, the duties expressly enjoined on him by
payment of the sum to cover the deficiency, law assess and collect all lawful revenues, to prevent
respondent manifesting his willingness to do so but and suppress smuggling and other frauds and to
failing to live up to his promise. As the car was kept enforce tariff and customs law would not have been
in a dwelling house at the Yabut Compound, two performed.
officials of the Customs Police Service as duly
authorized agents of petitioner, applied to While therefore, it is to be admitted that his warrant
respondent Judge for a warrant to search said of seizure and detention came later than the search
dwelling house and to seize the Rolls Royce car found warrant, there were indubitable facts in existence at
therein. that time to call for its issuance. Certainly, there was
probable cause. There was evidently need for the
Berdiago filed a motion to quash the search warrant issuance of a search warrant. It ought not to have
issued by the court based on lack of probable cause been thereafter quashed.
to issue the warrant. Collector Viduya opposed,
alleging that Berdiago could not rely on the TOMAS CHIA vs. THE ACTING COLLECTOR OF
constitutional right against unreasonable search and CUSTOMS, HON ALFREDO T. FRANCISCO,
seizure because it was not shown that he owned the Port Area, Manila, and, GENER SULA ASAC,
dwelling house which was searched. Nonetheless, Camp Emilio Aguinaldo, Quezon City
respondent Judge in the challenged order quashed G.R. No. L-43810 September 26, 1989
such search warrant.
GRIO-AQUINO, J.:
Hence, this petition.
FACTS:
ISSUE:
A verified report of a confidential informant that
Whether or not respondent Judge committed grave asserted electronic and electrical equipment and
abuse of discretion in quashing the warrant. other articles illegally imported into the Philippines
by a syndicate engaged in unlawful shipside
Page | 33
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

activities (foreign goods are unloaded form foreign goods seized for the purpose of enforcing the tariff
ships in transit through the Bureau of Customs, and customs laws.
thereby evading payment of the corresponding A party dissatisfied with the decision of the Collector
customs duties, and were found inside the Toms may appeal to the Commissioner of Customs, whose
electronics and Sony Merchandising after decision is appealable to the Court of Tax Appeals in
valuation, the Collector of Customs issued warrants the manner and within the period prescribed by law
of seizure and detention Nos: 14925 ad 14925-A. and regulations. The decision of the Court of Tax
Appeals may be elevated to the Supreme Court for
Search Warrant: review (Secs. 2309-2316; 2401 & 2402 of the Tariff
and Customs Code; Collector of Customs vs. Torres,
Various electronics equipment like cassette tape et al., 45 SCRA 272).
recorders, car stereos, phonograph needles, portable Since petitioner did not exhaust his administrative
TV sets, imported long playing records, spare parts remedies, his recourse to this Court is premature
of TVs and Radios and other electrical appliances. (Acting Collector of Customs of the Port of Manila vs.
Caluag, 20 SCRA 204; Laganapan vs. Asedillo, 154
ISSUE: SCRA 377; National Development Co. vs. Hervilla,
151 SCRA 520). If for no other reason, the petition
Whether the warrants of seizure and detention are is dismissible on that score.
general warrant issued in violation of Rule 126,
Sections 3 of Rules of Court and thus affect the BUKLOD NG KAWANING EIIB vs.
power of Custom as an Administrative body. HON. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY RONALDO B.
ZAMORA
RULING: G.R. Nos. 142801-802. July 10, 2001

NO. Section 2208 (Customs) Tariff and Customs SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.:


Code Right of Police Officer to enter in closure, a
warehouse, store, or other building or in closure used FACTS:
for keeping or storage or articles does not become a
dwelling house within the meaning. During the time of President Corazon Aquino, she
created the Economic Intelligence and Investigation
Section 2536 (Seizure of other articles) The Bureau (EIIB) to primarily conduct anti-smuggling
Commissioner of Customs and Collector of Customs operations in areas outside the jurisdiction of the
and or any other Customs officer, with the prior Bureau of Customs. In the year 2000, President
authorization in writing by the commissioner, may Estrada issued an order deactivating the EIIB. He
demand evidence of payment of duties and taxes on subsequently ordered the employees of EIIB to be
foreign articles. separated from the service. Thereafter, he created
the Presidential Anti-Smuggling Task Force
Aduana, which EIIB employees claim to be
Search of Dwelling House (Section 2209) Upon essentially the same as EIIB. The employees of EIIB,
warrant issued by a Judge of the Court or such other through the Buklod ng Kawaning EIIB, invoked the
responsible officers as may be authorized by law, Supreme Courts power of judicial review in
upon sworn application showing probable cause and questioning the said orders. EIIB employees
particularly describing the place to be searched and maintained that the president has no power to
the person or thing to be seized. abolish a public office, as that is a power solely
lodged in the legislature; and that the abolition
violates their constitutional right to security of
The warrants issued by the Collector of Customs in tenure.
this case were not general warrant, as erroneously
alleged by petitioner for they identified the stores to ISSUE:
be seized, described the articles to be seized and
specified the provision of the Tariff and Customs Whether the president has the power to abolish
Code. office and whether petitioners were deprived of their
right to security of tenure.
Admin law: Upon effecting the seizure of the
goods, the Bureau of Customs acquired exclusive
jurisdiction not only over the case but also over the
Page | 34
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

RULING: misconduct. His conviction was reported to the Office


of the President, at the same time, an administrative
No. It is a general rule that the power to abolish a complaint was filed with the same office. The
public office is lodged with the legislature. President then, based on the Sandiganbayan
conviction, created a committee to investigate Larin.
The exception is when it comes to agencies, bureaus, Eventually, Larins removal was recommended. The
and other offices under the executive department, President dismissed Larin.
the president may deactivate them pursuant to
control power over such offices, unless such office is ISSUE:
created by the Constitution.
1. Whether or not Larin was removed from office
This is also germane to the presidents power to properly (with just cause)
reorganize the Office of the President. Basis of such
power also has its roots in two laws i.e., PD 1772 and 2. Whether the reorganization in this case was
PD 1416. pursued in good faith.

These decrees expressly grant the President of the RULING:


Philippines the continuing authority to reorganize the
national government, which includes the power to 1. No. Larin is a presidential appointee who belongs
group, consolidate bureaus and agencies, to abolish to the career service of the Civil Service. Although it
offices, to transfer functions, to create and classify is a general rule that the power to remove is inherent
functions, services and activities and to standardize in the power to appoint, such power to remove I with
salaries and materials. The limition to this power to limitations. In the case at bar, the limitation can be
reorganize is that it must be pursued in good faith. found in the fact that Larin is a career service officer
and under the Administrative Code of 1987, such
Also, it cannot be said that there is bad faith in the officers who fall under career service are
abolition of EIIB. EIIB allocations has always characterized by the existence of security of tenure,
exceeded P100 million per year. To save the as contra-distinguished from non-career service
government some money, it needed to abolish it and whose tenure is co-terminus with that of the
replace it with TF Aduana which has for its allocation appointing authority or subject to his pleasure, or
just P50 million. Further, TYF Aduana is invested limited to a period specified by law or to the duration
more power that EIIB never had, i.e., search and of a particular project for which purpose the
seizure and arrest. Lastly, EEIB employees right to employment was made. As a career service officer,
security of tenure is not violated. Since there is no Larin enjoys the right to security of tenure. He can
bad faith in the abolition of EIIB, such abolition is not only be removed from his office on grounds
infirm. Valid abolition of offices is neither removal nor enumerated in the Administrative Code of 1987. In
separation of the incumbents. If the public office the case at bar, the basis for his removal was his
ceases to exist, there is no separation or dismissal to conviction in the Sandiganbayan this is not one of
speak of. Indeed, there is no such thing as an those grounds enumerated in the Administrative
absolute right to hold office. Except constitutional Code. Further, the Supreme Court notes that when
offices which provide for special immunity as regards Larins conviction was appealed to the Supreme
salary and tenure, no one can be said to have any Court, the Supreme Court actually absolved Larin.
vested right in an office or its salary.
2. No. It is Presidential Decree No. 1772 which
AQUILINO T. LARIN vs. THE EXECUTIVE amended Presidential Decree No. 1416. These
SECRETARY decrees expressly grant the President of the
G.R. No. 112745 October 16, 1997 Philippines the continuing authority to reorganize the
national government, which includes the power to
TORRES, JR., J.: group, consolidate bureaus and agencies, to abolish
offices, to transfer functions, to create and classify
FACTS: functions, services and activities and to standardize
salaries and materials.
Aquilino Larin was an Assistant Commissioner in the
Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR). He was in charge While the President's power to reorganize cannot be
of the office of the Excise Tax Service. In 1992, the denied, this does not mean however that the
Sandiganbayan convicted Larin for grave reorganization itself is properly made in accordance
Page | 35
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

with law. Well-settled is the rule that reorganization e) Where the removal violates the order of
is regarded as valid provided it is pursued in good separation provided in Section 3 hereof.
faith. Thus, in Dario vs. Mison, this Court has had the
occasion to clarify that: A reading of some of the provisions of the questioned
E.O. No. 132 clearly leads the court to an inescapable
As a general rule, a reorganization is carried out in conclusion that there are circumstances considered
"good faith" if it is for the purpose of economy or to as evidences of bad faith in the reorganization of the
make bureaucracy more efficient. In that event no BIR. (Example: the increase of number of
dismissal or separation actually occurs because the employees.)
position itself ceases to exist. And in that case the
security of tenure would not be a Chinese wall. Be THE UNITED STATES vs. ANICETO BARRIAS
that as it may, if the abolition which is nothing else G.R. No. 4349. September 24, 1908
but a separation or removal, is done for political
reasons or purposely to defeat security of tenure, or TRACEY, J.:
otherwise not in good faith, no valid abolition takes
place and whatever abolition is done is void ab initio. FACTS:
There is an invalid abolition as where there is merely
In 1904, Congress, through a law (Act No. 1136),
a change of nomenclature of positions or where
claims of economy are belied by the existence of authorized the Collector of Customs to regulate the
ample funds. business of lighterage. Lighterage is a business
involving the shipping of goods by use of lighters or
In this regard, it is worth mentioning that Section 2 cascos (small ships/boats).
of R. A. No. 6656 lists down the circumstances
evidencing bad faith in the removal of employees as The said law also provides that the Collector may
a result of the reorganization, thus: promulgate such rules to implement Act No. 1136.
Further, Act No. 1136 provides that in case a fine is
Sec. 2. No officer or employee in the career service to be imposed, it should not exceed one hundred
shall be removed except for a valid cause and after dollars. Pursuant to this, the Collector promulgated
due notice and hearing. A valid cause for removal Circular No. 397.
exists when, pursuant to a bona fide reorganization,
a position has been abolished or rendered redundant Meanwhile, Aniceto Barrias was caught navigating
or there is a need to merge, divide, or consolidate the Pasig River using a lighter which is manually
positions in order to meet the exigencies of the powered by bamboo poles (sagwan). Such is a
service, or other lawful causes allowed by the Civil violation of Circular No. 397 because under said
Service Law. The existence of any or some of the Circular, only steam powered ships should be
following circumstances may be considered as allowed to navigate the Pasig River. However, in the
evidence of bad faith in the removals made as a information against Barrias, it was alleged that the
result of the reorganization, giving rise to a claim for imposable penalty against him should be a fine not
reinstatement or reappointment by an aggrieved exceeding P500.00 at the discretion of the court
party: this was pursuant to Circular No. 397 which provides:
For the violation of any part of the foregoing
a) Where there is a significant increase in the number regulations, the persons offending shall be liable to
of positions in the new staffing pattern of the
a fine of not less than P5 and not more than P500,
department or agency concerned;
in the discretion of the court. Barrias now challenged
the validity of such provision of the Circular as it is
b) Where an office is abolished and another
performing substantially the same functions is entirely different from the penal provision of Act. No.
created; 1136 which only provided a penalty of not exceeding
$100.00 (Note at that time the peso-dollar exchange
c) Where incumbents are replaced by those less was more or less equal).
qualified in terms of status of appointment,
performance and merit; ISSUE:

d) Where there is a reclassification of offices in the Whether the penal provision in the Circular is valid.
department or agency concerned and the reclassified
offices perform substantially the same functions as
the original offices;

Page | 36
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

RULING: 'Premium More,' thereby removing the said brands


from the foreign brand category. Fortune also
No. The Commissioner cannot impose a different submitted proof the BIR that 'Champion' was an
range of penalty different from that specified by original register and therefore a local brand. Ad
Congress. If the Collector is allowed to do so, then in Valorem taxes were imposed on these brands. RA
effect, it is as if he is being delegated the power to 7654 was passed in it was provided that 55% ad
legislate penalties. One of the settled maxims in valorem tax will be imposed on local brands carrying
constitutional law is, that the power conferred upon a foreign name. Two days before the effectivity of
the legislature to make laws cannot be delegated by RA 7654, the BIR issued Revenue Memorandum
that department to anybody or authority. Where the Circular No. 37-93, in which Fortune was to be
sovereign power of the State has located the imposed 55% ad valorem tax on the three brands
authority, there it must remain; only by the classifying them as local brands carrying a foreign
constitutional agency alone the laws must be made name. Fortune filed a petition with the CTA which
until the constitution itself is changed. was granted finding the RMC as defective. The CIR
filed a motion for reconsideration with the CTA which
The power to whose judgment, wisdom, and was denied, then to the CA, an appeal, which was
patriotism this high prerogative has been entrusted also denied.
cannot relieve itself of the responsibility by choosing
other agencies upon which the power shall be ISSUE:
developed, nor can its substitutes the judgment,
wisdom, and patriotism and of any other body for Whether the RMC was valid.
those to which alone the people have seen fit to
confide this sovereign trust. This doctrine is based RULING:
on the ethical principle that such a delegated power
constitutes not only a right but a duty to be NO. The RMC was made to place the three brands
performed by the delegate by the instrumentality of as locally made cigarettes bearing foreign brands
his own judgment acting immediately upon the and to thereby have them covered by RA 7654.
matter of legislation and not through the intervening Specifically, the new law would have its amendatory
mind of another. The Collector cannot exercise a provisions applied to locally manufactured cigarettes
power exclusively lodged in Congress. which at the time of its effectivity were not so
classified as bearing foreign brands. Prior to the
Hence, Barrias should be penalized in accordance to issuance of the RMC, the brands were subjected to
the penalty being imposed by Act No. 1136. In this 45% ad valorem tax. In so doing, the BIR not simply
case, the Supreme Court determined that the proper interpreted the law but it legislated under its quasi-
fine is $25.00. legislative authority. The due observance of the
requirements of notice, of hearing, and of publication
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE vs. should not have been then ignored. The Court is
HON. COURT OF APPEALS, HON. COURT OF convinced that the hastily promulgated RMC 37-93
TAX APPEALS and FORTUNE TOBACCO has fallen short of a valid and effective administrative
CORPORATION issuance.
G.R. No. 119761 August 29, 1996
PILIPINAS SHELL PETROLEUM
VITUG, J.: CORPORATION vs. COMMISSIONER OF
INTERNAL REVENUE
FACTS: G.R. No. 172598. December 21, 2007

Fortune Tobacco Corporation is engaged in the VELASCO, JR., J.:


manufacture of different brands of cigarettes. On
various dates, the Philippine Patent Office issued to FACTS:
the corporation separate certificates of trademark
registration over "Champion," "Hope," and "More" In 1988, BIR sent a collection letter to Petitioner
cigarettes. The CIR initially classified 'Champion,' Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation (PSPC) for
'Hope,' and 'More' as foreign brands since they were alleged deficiency excise tax liabilities of PhP
listed in the World Tobacco Directory as belonging to 1,705,028,008.06 for the taxable years 1992 and
foreign companies. However, Fortune changed the 1994 to 1997, inclusive of delinquency surcharges
names of 'Hope' to Hope Luxury' and 'More' to and interest. As basis for the collection letter, the BIR
Page | 37
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

alleged that PSPC is not a qualified transferee of the RULING:


TCCs it acquired from other BOI-registered
companies. 1. No. Petitioner is not liable for the assessment of
deficiency excise tax. In the instant case, with due
These alleged excise tax deficiencies covered by the application, approval, and acceptance of the
collection letter were already paid by PSPC with TCCs payment by PSPC of the subject TCCs for its then
acquired through, and issued and duly authorized by outstanding excise tax liabilities in 1992 and 1994 to
the Center, and duly covered by Tax Debit 1997, the subject TCCs have been canceled as the
Memoranda (TDM) of both the Center and BIR, with money value of the tax credits these represented
the latter also issuing the corresponding Accept have been used up.
Payment for Excise Taxes (APETs). PSPC protested
the collection letter, but it was denied. Because of Therefore, the DOF through the Center may not now
respondent inaction on a motion for reconsideration cancel the subject TCCs as these have already been
PSPC filed a petition for review before the CTA. In canceled and used up after their acceptance as
1999, the CTA ruled that the use by PSPC of the TCCs payment for PSPCs excise tax liabilities. What has
was legal and valid, and that respondents attempt been used up, debited, and canceled cannot
to collect alleged delinquent taxes and penalties from anymore be declared to be void, ineffective, and
PSPC without an assessment constitutes denial of canceled anew. Besides, it is indubitable that with
due process. the issuance of the corresponding TDM, not only is
the TCC canceled when fully utilized, but the
Respondent elevated CTA Decision to the Court of payment is also final subject only to a post-audit on
Appeals (CA) through a petition for review. computational errors. Under RR 5-2000, a TDM is a
certification, duly issued by the Commissioner or his
Despite the pendency of this case, PSPC received duly authorized representative, reduced in a BIR
assessment letter from respondent for excise tax Accountable Form in accordance with the prescribed
deficiencies, surcharges, and interest based on the formalities, acknowledging that the taxpayer named
first batch of cancelled TCCs and TDM covering therein has duly paid his internal revenue tax liability
PSPCs use of the TCCs. All these cancelled TDM and in the form of and through the use of a Tax Credit
TCCs were also part of the subject matter of the now Certificate, duly issued and existing in accordance
pending before the CA. PSPC protested the with the provisions of these Regulations. The Tax
assessment letter, but the protest was denied by the Debit Memo shall serve as the official receipt from
BIR, constraining it to file another case before the the BIR evidencing a taxpayers payment or
CTA. Subsequently, CTA ruled in favor of PSPC and satisfaction of his tax obligation. The amount shown
accordingly cancelled and set aside the assessment therein shall be charged against and deducted from
issued by the respondent. Respondent motion for the credit balance of the aforesaid Tax Credit
reconsideration of the above decision which was Certificate. Thus, with the due issuance of TDM by
rejected thus respondent appealed the above the Center and TDM by the BIR, the payments made
decision before the CTA En Banc. by PSPC with the use of the subject TCCs have been
effected and consummated as the TDMs serve as the
The CTA En Banc ruled in favor of respondent and official receipts evidencing PSPCs payment or
ordered PSPC to pay the amount of P570,577,401.61 satisfaction of its tax obligation. Moreover, the BIR
as deficiency excise tax for the taxable years 1992 not only issued the corresponding TDM, but it also
and 1994 to 1997, inclusive of 25% surcharge and issued ATAPETs which doubly show the payment of
20% interest. the subject excise taxes of PSPC. Based on the above
discussion, we hold that respondent erroneously and
ISSUE: without factual and legal basis levied the
assessment. Consequently, the CTA En Banc erred in
1. Whether petitioner is liable for the assessment of sustaining respondents assessment.
deficiency excise tax after the validly issued TCCs
were subsequently cancelled for having been issued 2. Yes. The facts show that PSPC was not accorded
fraudulently. due process before the assessment was levied on it.
The Center required PSPC to submit certain sales
2. Whether petitioner was denied procedural due documents relative to supposed delivery of IFOs by
process. PSPC to the TCC transferors. PSPC contends that it
could not submit these documents as the transfer of
the subject TCCs did not require that it be a supplier
Page | 38
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

of materials and/or component supplies to the PNOC-ENERGY DEVELOPMENT


transferors in a letter dated October 29, 1999 which CORPORATION vs. NLRC and DANILO
was received by the Center on November 3, 1999. MERCADO
On the same day, the Center informed PSPC of the G.R. No. 79182 September 11, 1991
cancellation of the subject TCCs and the TDM
covering the application of the TCCs to PSPCs excise PARAS, J.:
tax liabilities. The objections of PSPC were brushed
aside by the Center and the assessment was issued
FACTS:
by respondent on November 15, 1999, without
following the statutory and procedural requirements
clearly provided under the NIRC and applicable In June 1985, Danilo Mercado was dismissed by
regulations. PNOC-Energy Development Corporation (PNOC-
EDC) due to serious acts of dishonesty allegedly
What is applicable is RR 12-99, which superseded RR committed by Mercado. Mercado then filed a
12-85, pursuant to Sec. 244 in relation to Sec. 245 complaint for illegal dismissal against PNOC-EDC.
of the NIRC implementing Secs. 6, 7, 204, 228, 247, PNOC-EDC filed a motion to dismiss on the ground
248, and 249 on the assessment of national internal that the Labor arbiter and/or the National Labor
revenue taxes, fees, and charges. The procedures Relations Commission (NLRC) has no jurisdiction
delineated in the said statutory provisos and RR 12- over PNOC-EDC because it is a subsidiary of the
99 were not followed by respondent, depriving PSPC Philippine National Oil Company (PNOC), a
of due process in contesting the formal assessment government owned or controlled corporation, and as
levied against it. Respondent ignored RR 12-99 and a subsidiary, it is also a GOCC and as such, the
did not issue PSPC a notice for informal proper forum for Mercados suit is the Civil Service
conference and a preliminary assessment notice, as
Commission.
required. PSPCs November 4, 1999 motion for
reconsideration of the purported Center findings and
cancellation of the subject TCCs and the TDM was ISSUE:
not even acted upon.
Whether or not PBOC-EDC is correct.
PSPC was merely informed that it is liable for the
amount of excise taxes it declared in its excise tax RULING:
returns for 1992 and 1994 to 1997 covered by the
subject TCCs via the formal letter of demand and No. The issue in this case has been decided already
assessment notice. For being formally defective, the in the case of PNOC-EDC vs Leogardo. It is true that
November 15, 1999 formal letter of demand and PNOC is a GOCC and that PNOC-EDC, being a
assessment notice is void. Paragraph 3.1.4 of Sec. 3, subsidiary of PNOC, is likewise a GOCC. It is also true
RR 12-99 pertinently provides: that under the 1973 Constitution, all GOCCs are
under the jurisdiction of the CSC. However, the 1987
3.1.4 Formal Letter of Demand and Assessment Constitution change all this as it now provides: The
Notice.The formal letter of demand and Civil Service embraces all branches, subdivisions,
assessment notice shall be issued by the instrumentalities and agencies of the Government,
Commissioner or his duly authorized representative. including government-owned or controlled
The letter of demand calling for payment of the corporations with original charters. (Article IX-B,
taxpayers deficiency tax or taxes shall state the Section 2 [1]) Hence, the above provision sets the
facts, the law, rules and regulations, or jurisprudence
rule that the mere fact that a corporation is a GOCC
on which the assessment is based, otherwise, the
does not automatically place it under the CSC. Under
formal letter of demand and assessment
notice shall be void. The same shall be sent to the this provision, the test in determining whether a
taxpayer only by registered mail or by personal GOCC is subject to the Civil Service Law is the
delivery. x x x (Emphasis supplied.) manner of its creation such that government
corporations created by special charter are subject
In short, respondent merely relied on the findings of to its provisions while those incorporated under the
the Center which did not give PSPC ample general Corporation Law are not within its coverage.
opportunity to air its side. While PSPC indeed In the case at bar, PNOC-EDC, even though it is a
protested the formal assessment, such does not GOCC, was incorporated under the general
denigrate the fact that it was deprived of statutory Corporation Law it does not have its own charter,
and procedural due process to contest the hence, it is under the jurisdiction of the MOLE. Even
assessment before it was issued. though the facts of this case occurred while the 1973
Constitution was still in force, the provisions of the
Page | 39
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

1987 Constitution regarding the legal matters It has to be conceded that PETROPHIL was not
[procedural aspect] are applicable because it is the created by special law. As the incumbent Solicitor
law in force at the time of the decision. General has pointed out, it was originally created as
a private corporation under the Corporation Law with
FELICITO R. QUIMPO vs. TANODBAYAN the name Standard Vacuum Oil Company
(OMBUDSMAN), GREG DIMAANO and DANNY (STANVAC). STANVAC was taken over by Esso
F. REMO Philippines, which was, in turn, bought by Esso
G.R. No. 72553 December 2, 1986 Eastern Standard. Eventually, Esso Eastern Standard
was purchased by the Philippine National Oil
MELENCIO-HERRERA, J.: Corporation (PNOC), and its corporate name was
changed to Petrophil Corporation.
FACTS:
While it may be that PETROPHIL was not originally
Petitioner filed with respondent Tanodbayan a "created" as a government-owned or controlled
complaint against private respondents for violation corporation, after it was acquired by PNOC, which is
of Republic Act No. 3091 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt a government-owned or controlled corporation,
Practices Act). PETROPHIL became a subsidiary of PNOC and thus
shed-off its private status. It is now funded and
Petitioner alleged that Admiral Adjusters and owned by the government as, in fact, it was acquired
Surveyors, Inc. (AASI), of which he was the to perform functions related to government
president, was engaged by Petrophil Corporation to programs and policies on oil, a vital commodity in the
render survey services for one (1) year from March economic life of the nation. It was acquired not
1, 1982 to February 28, 1983; that upon the temporarily but as a permanent adjunct to perform
expiration of the contract, it was renewed for essential government or government-related
another period of one (1) year, from March 1, 1983 functions, as the marketing arm of PNOC to assist
to February 2, 1984; that sometime in October, the latter in selling and distributing oil and petroleum
1983, private respondents Greg Dimaano and Danny products to assure and maintain an adequate and
Remo, as manager and analyst, respectively, of the stable domestic supply.
Bulk Distribution Department and MPED of Petrophil
Corporation, caused the withholding of the fees due It should make no substantial difference that it was
AASI and required AASI to submit an explanation of not originally "created" as a government-owned or
the losses caused by leaking valves as reflected in controlled corporation. What is decisive is that it has
AASI's survey reports; that despite AASI's since been acquired by the Government to perform
explanation, private respondents still refused to functions related to government programs and
release the payments and even threatened to forfeit policies on oil.
AASI's performance bond and claim damages and
losses from AASI; that despite AASI's submission of The meaning thus given to "government-owned or
several explanations, private respondents refused to controlled corporations" for purposes of the civil
release the fees amounting to P147,300.00. service provision should likewise apply for purposes
of the Tanodbayan and Sandiganbayan provisions,
Private respondents moved to dismiss the Complaint otherwise, incongruity would result, and a
alleging lack of jurisdiction of the Tanodbayan, which government-owned corporation could create as
Motion was opposed by the petitioner. many subsidiary corporations under the Corporation
Code as it wishes, which would then be free from
ISSUE: strict accountability and could escape the liabilities
and responsibilities provided for by law. This device
Whether PETROPHIL Corporation, a subsidiary of the was liberally made use of during the past regime to
Philippine National Oil Company (PNOC), is a the detriment of budgetary restraints and of fiscal
government-owned or controlled corporation, whose accountability by "private" corporations thus created.
employees fall under Tanodbayan jurisdiction, or
not.

RULLING:

Employees of PETROPHIL Corporation fall under


Tanodbayan jurisdiction.
Page | 40
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

TRADE UNIONS OF THE PHILIPPINES AND is provided for under Executive Order No. 180.
ALLIED SERVICES vs. Chapter IV thereof, consisting of Sections 9 to 12,
NATIONAL HOUSING CORPORATION and regulates the determination of the "sole and
ATTY. VIRGILIO SY, as Officer-in-Charge of exclusive employees representative"; Under Section
the Bureau of Labor Relations 12, "where there are two or more duly registered
G.R. No. L-49677 May 4, 1989 employees' organizations in the appropriate
organization unit, the Bureau of Labor Relations
REGALADO, J.: shall, upon petition order the conduct of certification
election and shall certify the winner as the exclusive
FACTS: representative of the rank-and-file employees in said
organizational unit."
On July 13, 1977, TUPAS filed a petition for the
conduct of a certification election with Regional Parenthetically, note should be taken of the specific
Office No. IV of the Department of Labor in order to qualification in the Constitution that the State "shall
determine the exclusive bargaining representative of guarantee the rights of all workers to self-
the workers in NHC. It was claimed that its members organization, collective bargaining, and peaceful
comprised the majority of the employees of the concerted activities, including the right to strike in
corporation. The petition was dismissed by med- accordance with law" and that they shall also
arbiter Eusebio M. Jimenez in an order, dated participate in policy and decision-making processes
November 7, 1977, holding that NHC "being a affecting their rights and benefits as may be provided
government-owned and/or controlled corporation its by law."
employees/workers are prohibited to form, join or ON THE FOREGOING CONSIDERATIONS, the
assist any labor organization for purposes of assailed resolution of the Bureau of Labor Relations,
collective bargaining pursuant to Section 1, Rule II, dated November 21, 1978, is ANNULLED and SET
Book V of the Rules and Regulations Implementing ASIDE and the conduct of a certification election
the Labor Code." among the affected employees of respondent
National Housing Corporation in accordance with the
From this order of dismissal, TUPAS appealed to the rules therefor is hereby GRANTED.
Bureau of Labor Relations where, acting thereon in
BLR Case No. A-984-77 (RO4-MED-1090-77), NOTES:
Director Carmelo C. Noriel reversed the order of
dismissal and ordered the holding of a certification ARTICLE IX-A:
election. This order was, however, set aside by Section 2. No member of a Constitutional
Officer-in-Charge Virgilio S.J. Sy in his resolution of Commission shall, during his tenure, hold any other
November 21, 1978 6 upon a motion for office or employment. Neither shall he engage in the
reconsideration of respondent NHC. practice of any profession or in the active
management or control of any business which, in any
In the instant petition for certiorari, TUPAS seeks the way, may be affected by the functions of his office,
reversal of the said resolution and prays that a nor shall he be financially interested, directly or
certification election be held among the rank and file indirectly, in any contract with, or in any franchise or
employees of NHC. privilege granted by the Government, any of its
subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities, including
ISSUE: government-owned or controlled corporations or
their subsidiaries.
Whether the employees of NHC have the right to
form union being employees of the GOCC. ARTICLE IX-B

RULING: Section 5. The Congress shall provide for the


standardization of compensation of government
With respect to other civil servants, that is, officials and employees, including those in
employees of all branches, subdivisions, government-owned or controlled corporations with
instrumentalities and agencies of the government original charters, taking into account the nature of
including government-owned or controlled the responsibilities pertaining to, and the
corporations with original charters and who are, qualifications required for, their positions.
therefore, covered by the civil service laws, the
guidelines for the exercise of their right to organize
Page | 41
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

ARTICLE IX-D LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS

Section 2 (1) Classifications of Positions under CSC Law

The Commission on Audit shall have the power, READ AND MASTER
authority, and duty to examine, audit, and settle all
accounts pertaining to the revenue and receipts of, CHAPTER 2,, SEC. 7, SUB A, TITLE I, BOOK 5
and expenditures or uses of funds and property, OF EO 292 (Career and non-career position of
owned or held in trust by, or pertaining to, the CSC)
Government, or any of its subdivisions, agencies, or
instrumentalities, including government-owned or Chapter 2 Coverage of the Civil Service
controlled corporations with original charters, and on
a post- audit basis: SEC. 6. Scope of the Civil Service.

a. constitutional bodies, commissions and (1) The Civil Service embraces all branches,
offices that have been granted fiscal subdivisions, instrumentalities, and agencies of the
autonomy under this Constitution; Government, including government-owned or
controlled corporations with original charters.
b. autonomous state colleges and universities; (2) Positions in the Civil Service shall be classified
into career service and noncareer service.
c. other government-owned or controlled
corporations and their subsidiaries; and SEC. 7. Career Service.
d. such non-governmental entities receiving
subsidy or equity, directly or indirectly, from The Career Service shall be characterized by
or through the Government, which are
required by law or the granting institution (1) entrance based on merit and fitness to be
to submit to such audit as a condition of determined as far as practicable by competitive
subsidy or equity. However, where the examination, or based on highly technical
internal control system of the audited qualifications;
agencies is inadequate, the Commission
may adopt such measures, including (2) opportunity for advancement to higher career
temporary or special pre-audit, as are positions; and
necessary and appropriate to correct the
deficiencies. It shall keep the general (3) security of tenure.
accounts of the Government and, for such
period as may be provided by law, preserve The Career Service shall include:
the vouchers and other supporting papers
pertaining thereto. (1) Open Career positions, appointment to which
prior qualification in an appropriate examination is
required;

(2) Closed Career position which are scientific or


highly technical in nature; these include the faculty
and academic staff of state colleges and universities,
and scientific and technical positions in scientific or
research institutions which shall establish and
maintain their own merit systems;

(3) Positions in the Career Executive Service, namely,


Undersecretary, Assistant Secretary, Bureau
Director, Assistant Bureau Director, Regional
Director, Assistant Regional Director, Chief of
Department Service and other officers of equivalent
rank as may be identified by the Career Executive
Service Board, all of whom are appointed by the
President;
Page | 42
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

(5) Emergency and seasonal personnel.


(4) Career officers other than those in the Career
Executive Service, who are appointed by the
President, such as the Foreign Service Officers in the AS TO THE NATURE OF APPOINTMENT AND
Department of Foreign Affairs; DEFINITION

(5) Commission officers and enlisted men of the PAMANTASAN NG LUNGSOD NG MAYNILA vs.
Armed Forces which shall maintain a separate merit HON. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT
system; G.R. No. L-65439 November 13, 1985

(6) Personnel of government-owned or controlled GUTIERREZ, JR., J.:


corporations, whether performing governmental or
proprietary functions, who do not fall under the non- FACTS:
career service; and
Dr. Esteban had been a permanent employee in the
(7) Permanent laborer, whether skilled, semi-skilled, government for 25 years. Until May 20, 1973, he was
or unskilled. officially connected with the Philippine College of
Commerce (PCC) as its Vice President for Academic
Affairs. However, the position he held was abolished
SEC. 9. Non-Career Service.
due to PCC Board of Director's move to streamline
the college organization. Dr. Estaban was given by
The Non-Career Service shall be characterized by PCC an option to continue teaching therein which he
accepted until his transfer to the Pamantasan ng
(1) entrance on bases other than those of the usual Lungsod ng Maynila (PLM) upon the invitation of its
tests of merit and fitness utilized for the career President Dr. Consuelo Blanco.
service; and
At PLM, Dr. Esteban was initially extended an ad
(2) tenure which is limited to a period specified by interim temporary appointment as Vice President for
law, or which is coterminous with that of the Administration by Dr. Blanco and from that Dr.
appointing authority or subject to his pleasure, or Esteban received his "Notification of Confirmation of
which is limited to the duration of a particular project Temporary Appointment from the PLM's Secretary on
June 28, 1973.
for which purpose employment was made.
The temporary appointments of Dr. Esteban as Vice
The Non-Career Service shall include: President for Administration was renewed and
extended several times and it continuous for almost
(1) Elective officials and their personal or confidential two and half years until he discovered that he was
staff; not included in the list of employees recommended
for permanent appointments. He requested Dr.
(2) Secretaries and other officials of Cabinet rank Blanco to convert his temporary appointment into a
who hold their positions at the pleasure of the permanent one but it was not granted.
President and their personal or confidential staff(s);
On August 7, 1975, Dr. Consuelo Blanco issued a
(3) Chairman and members of commissions and memorandum circular terminating Dr. Esteban's
appointment as VP for Administration. Dr. Esteban
boards with fixed terms of office and their personal
appealed to CSC for the protection of his tenure in
or confidential staff;
the Pamantasan.

(4) Contractual personnel or those who employment ISSUE:


in the government is in accordance with a special
contract to undertake a specific work or job, Whether Dr. Esteban holds the position in a
requiring special or technical skills not available in permanent capacity as to guarantee a security of
the employing agency, to be accomplished within a tenure.
specific period, which in no case shall exceed one
year, and performs or accomplishes the specific work
or job, under his own responsibility with a minimum
of direction and supervision form the hiring agency;
and

Page | 43
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

RULING: Under Section 13, par. (d) RA 7227:

Yes. "The President shall appoint a professional manager


as the Administrator of the Subic Authority with a
Dr Esteban had been extended several "ad compensation to be determined by the Board subject
interim appointments which PLM mistakenly to the approval of the Secretary of Budget, who shall
understands the term ad interim as appointments be the ex-officio chairman of the Board and who shall
temporary in nature. In referring to Dr. Esteban's serve as the Chief Executive Officer of the Subic
appointment, the term is not descriptive of the Authority. Provided, however, that for the first year
nature of the appointments given to him. Rather, it of its operations from the effectivity of this act, the
is used to denote the manner in which said Mayor of the City of Olongapo shall be appointed as
appointments were made, that is, done by the the Chairman and Chief executive officer of the Subic
President of PLM in the meantime, while the Board Authority."
of Regents, which is originally vested by the
University Charter with the power of appointment, is Respondent Franklin Drilon was then the incumbent
unable to act. Mayor of the City of Olongapo.

Not only is the appointment in question an ad interim With this petitioner, who claims to be taxpayers,
appointment, but the same is also a confirmed ad employees of the US Facility at the Subic Zambales
interim appointment. In its Resolution No. 485, dated and officers and members of the Filipino Civilian
June 20, 1973, the PLM Board of Regents verified Dr. Employees Association in US Facilities in the
Esteban's appointment without condition nor Philippines, maintain that the provision in par (d) of
limitation as to tenure. As of that moment, it became Section 13 infringes the following constitutional and
a regular and permanent appointment. statutory provisions:

In other words, if the Board is in session, the PLM (a) Sec. 7 (1) Art. IX-B of the Constitution, which
President merely nominates while the Board issues states that "no elective official shall be eligible for
the appointment. But when the Board is not in appointment or designation in any capacity to any
session, the President is authorized to issue ad public office or position during his tenure."
interim appointment. Such appointments are
permanent but their terms are only until the Board (b) Sec. 16, Art. VII of the Constitution, which
disapproves them. If confirmed, the appointee's term provides that the President shall appoint all other
is converted into the regular term inherent in the officers of the Government whose appointments are
position. not otherwise provided for by law, and those whom
he may be authorized by law to appoint.
DEFINITION OF APPOINTMENT
(c) Sec. 261 par. (g) of the Omnibus Election Code
Appointment is one of the means by which a person which provides Prohibition on Appointments within
may claim a right to a public office. It means the prohibited 45-day period prior to the May 11, 1992
selection by the authority vested with the power of Elections.
an individual who is to exercise the functions of a
ISSUE:
given office. It is an act of designation by the
1. Whether the proviso violates the constitutional
executive officer, board or body to whom that power
proscription against appointment or designation of
has been delegated, of the person who is to exercise
elective officials to other government posts.
the duties and responsibilities of the given position.
It is also equivalent to filling a vacancy.
2. Whether or not the SBMA posts are merely ex
officio to the position of Mayor of Olongapo City and
ROBERTO A. FLORES ET. AL, v. HON.
thus an excepted circumstance.
FRANKLIN M. DRILON
G.R. No. 104732 June 22, 1993
3. Whether or not the Constitutional provision
allowing an elective official to receive
BELLOSILLO, J.:
double compensation (Sec. 8, Art. IX-B) would be
FACTS: useless if no elective official may be appointed to
The constitutionality of Sec. 13, par. (d) of RA 7227 another post.
otherwise known as the Bases Conversion and
Development Act of 1992 is challenged in this 4. Whether there is legislative encroachment on the
original petition. appointing authority of the President.

Page | 44
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

5. Whether Mayor Gordon may retain any and all per congressional authority to prescribe qualifications
diems, allowances and other emoluments which he where only one, and no other, can qualify. Since the
may have received pursuant to his appointment. ineligibility of an elective official
for appointment remains all throughout his tenure or
HELD: during his incumbency, he may however resign first
from his elective post to cast off the constitutionally-
(1) YES, Sec. 7 of Art. IX-B of attached disqualification before he may be
the Constitution Provides: No elective official shall be considered fit for appointment. Consequently, as
eligible for appointment or designation in any long as he is an incumbent, an elective official
capacity to any public office or position during his remains ineligible for appointment to another public
tenure. Unless otherwise allowed by law or by the office.
primary functions of his position, no appointive
official shall hold any other office or employment in (5) YES, as incumbent elective official, Gordon is
the Government or any subdivision, agency or ineligible for appointment to the position of
instrumentality thereof, including government- Chairman and CEO of SBMA; hence,
owned or controlled corporations or their his appointment thereto cannot be sustained. He
subsidiaries. The subject proviso directs the however remains Mayor of Olongapo City, and his
President to appoint an elective official i.e. the Mayor acts as SBMA official are not necessarily null and
of Olongapo City, to other government post (as void; he may be considered a de facto officer, and
Chairman and CEO of SBMA). This is precisely what in accordance with jurisprudence, is entitled to such
the Constitution prohibits. It seeks to prevent a benefits.
situation where a local elective official will work for
his appointment in an executive position in
government, and thus neglect his constitutents. OSCAR BERMUDEZ ET. AL. vs. EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY RUBEN TORRES ET. AL
(2) NO, Congress did not contemplate making the G.R. No. 131429. August 4, 1999
SBMA posts as automatically attached to the Office
of the Mayor without need of appointment. The VITUG, J.:
phrase shall be appointed unquestionably shows
FACTS:
the intent to make the SBMA posts appointive and
not merely adjunct to the post of Mayor of Olongapo There occurred a vacancy in the Office of the
City. Provincial Prosecutor of Tarlac. Justice Sec. Teofisto
Guingona, Jr. recommended First Assistant Provincial
(3) NO, Sec. 8 does not affect the constitutionality of Prosecutor of Tarlac and OIC of Office of the
the subject proviso. In any case, the Vice-President Provincial Prosecutor Oscar Bermudez while Conrado
for example, an elective official who may be Quiaoit on the otherhand was supported by then
appointed to a cabinet post, may receive Rep. Jose Yap of the Second Legislative District of
the compensation attached to the cabinet position if Tarlac.
specifically authorized by law.
On June 30, 1997, Quiaoit emerged the victor when
he was appointed by then President Ramos to the
(4) YES, although Section 13(d) itself vests in the
coveted office. Quiaoit assumed office upon receipt
President the power to appoint the Chairman of
of his certified xerox copy of appointment and after
SBMA, he really has no choice but to appoint the taking an oath. However, Bermudez still refuse to
Mayor of Olongapo City. The power of choice is the vacate the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor.
heart of the power to appoint. Appointment involves Bermudez contends that the provision under Book
an exercise of discretion of whom to appoint. Hence, IV, Title III, Chapter II, Section 9 of the Revised
when Congress clothes the President with the power Administrative Code (RAC) of 1987 is not complied
to appoint an officer, it cannot at the same time limit for the appointment of Quiaoit lacks
the choice of the President to only one candidate. recommendation from Justice Secretary.
Such enactment effectively eliminates the discretion
of the appointing power to choose and constitutes ISSUE:
an irregular restriction on the power of appointment.
While it may be viewed that the proviso merely sets Whether there is a need for recommendation from
Justice Secretary to make respondent's appointment
the qualifications of the officer during the
effective.
first year of operations of SBMA, i.e., he must be the
Mayor of Olongapo City, it is manifestly an abuse of
Page | 45
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

The appointment is deemed complete once the last


act required of the appointing authority has been
RULING: complied with and its acceptance thereafter by the
appointee in order to render it effective.
No, the provision given in Section 9 of RAC of 1987 Appointment necessarily calls for an exercise of
must not be misunderstood. Under the said discretion on the part of the appointing authority.
provision:
The Constitution or law clothes the President with
"All provincial and City Prosecutors and their the power to appoint a subordinate officer, such
assistants shall be appointed by the President upon conferment must be understood as necessarily
the recommendation of the Secretary of Justice" carrying with it an ample discretion of whom to
appoint. The President is the head of government
This provision must not be construed as a mandatory whose authority includes the power of control over
requirement of prior recommendation by the Justice all executive departments, bureaus and offices.
Secretary. There is no fast rule in ascertaining Control means the authority of an empowered officer
whether the language in a statute should be to alter or modify, or even nullify or set aside, what
considered mandatory or directory. More often than a subordinate officer has done in the performance of
not, it is addressed on a case to case basis taking his duties, as well as to substitute the judgment of
into consideration and determining the nature, the latter, as and when the former deems it to be
structure and aim of the law itself by looking at the appropriate. Expressed in another way, the President
legislative intent. has the power to assume directly the functions of an
executive department, bureau and office.
In this case, the provision is not mandatory in
character. The power to appoint is, in essence a NULLIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT (Is it valid
discretionary one. on the ground that someone is better?

An appointment to public office is the unequivocal DANILO F.C. RIMONTE vs.


act of designating or selecting by one having the CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, OFFICE OF
authority therefor of an individual to discharge and
THE OMBUDSMAN and HENRIETTA F. ROQUE
perform the duties and functions of an office or trust.
G.R. No. 112045 May 29, 1995
Appointment necessarily calls for an exercise of
discretion on the part of the appointing authority.
The appointing power has the right of choice which BELLOSILLO, J.:
he may exercise freely according to his judgment,
deciding for himself who is best qualified among FACTS:
those who have the necessary qualifications and
eligibility. Petitioner was the incumbent Planning Officer III in
the Office of the Ombudsman. Ombudsman Conrado
The Constitution clothed the President with the M. Vasquez issued Office Order No. 90-32 directing
power to appoint a subordinate officer. Being the the implementation of the "performance appraisal
head of the government, his authority includes the system" as a basis for evaluation of providing for the
power of control over all executive departments, "General Policy and Procedural Guidelines in the
bureaus and offices, and the power to assume Placement of Personnel for the New Staffing
directly the functions of the latter. Hence, the Pattern".
President can interfere in the exercise of discretion
of officials under him or altogether ignore their Petitioner applied to different positions including any
recommendations. of the positions of Records Officer V of the Central
Records Division. Petitioner was appointed to the
Applying this, the phrase "upon recommendation of position of Associate Graft Investigation Officer III
the Secretary should be interpreted as a mere while Henrietta F. Roque was appointed Records
advice, exhortation or indorsement, which is Officer V.
essentially persuasive in character and not binding or
obligatory upon the party whom it is made. Petitioner filed a protest on Roque's appointment to
CSC and assailed that he has the better qualifications
NOTES: than her. However, CSC denied his protest, the same
with his motion for reconsideration.
An appointment to a public office is the unequivocal
act of designating or selecting by one having the ISSUE:
authority therefor of an individual to discharge and
perform the duties and functions of an office or trust. 1. Whether CSC commits grave abuse of discretion.

Page | 46
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

2. Whether the appointment made by the appointing appointment. The Board dismissed her protest but
authority may be disregarded on the ground that later on appeal to the same Board. The latter
someone has better qualification than the appointed promulgated a decision revoking Abilas appointment
officer. and directed the OIC or Mayor of Quezon City to
appiont Eleria in lieu of Abila. They ruled that
RULING: although both Abila and Eleria met the minimum
elgibility and education, Eleria had the edge in terms
1. No. CSC is correct in ruling that the appointment
of rank and experience as an Adiministrative Officer
of Roque to the position is proper and that she is
qualified to the disputed position. and Eleria actually held the position next-in-rank to
that of the vacancy that gave her promotional
The CSC is the single arbiter of all contests relating priority over Abila.
to Civil Service; as such its judgement are
unappealable and subject only to certiorari ISSUE:
jurisdiction of the Court.
1. Whether CSC has authority to substitute its own
CSC did not commit grave abuse of discretion in the judgment for that of the official authorized by law to
exercise of its jurisdiction in attesting to the make an appointment to the government service.
appointment of Roque. As long as the appointee is
qualified, the CSC has no choice but to attest and to
2. Whether the appointment made by appointing
respect the appointment even if it be proved that
authority may be disregarded by following the next-
there are others with superior credentials. The law
in-rank rule.
limits the Commissions authority only to whether or
not the appointees possess the legal qualifications
and the appropriate civil service eligibility, nothing RULING:
else.
1. No.The respondent Commission has no such
In this case, CSC founds out that Roque possesses authority, the power of appointment, which is
all qualifications to the position. Now the discretion essentially discretionary, being vested by law in the
to appoint her leaves to the appointing authority. head of the office concerned. The head of the office
is the person on the spot. He occupies the ideal
2. No. The power of appointment is essentially vantage point from which to identify and designate
discretionary provided the appointee is qualified. the individual who can best fill the post and
Even though someone is said to be better or proved
discharge its functions in the government agency he
to have superior credentials, the head of the agency
heads. The choice of an appointee from among those
who is the appointing power is the one most
knowledgeable to decide who can best perform the who possess the required qualifications is a political
functions of the office. and administrative decision calling for considerations
NEXT IN RANK: Is it Necessary? of wisdom, convenience, utility and the interests of
service which can best be made by the head of the
ALEX A. ABILA vs. CIVIL SERVICE office concerned, the person most familiar with the
COMMISSION and FLORENTINA E. ELERIA organizational structure and environmental
G.R. No. 92573 June 3, 1991 circumstances within which the appointee must
function.
FELICIANO, J.:

FACTS: In Lapinid vs. Civil Service Commission, the Court


through Mr. Justice Cruz, stressed that the Civil
Alex A. Abila, Acting Assistant Civil Security Officer of Service Commission has no power of appointment
Civil Intelligence and Security Department of the except over its own personnel. Neither does it have
Quezon City Government was appointed by then the authority to review the appointments made by
other offices except only to ascertain if the appointee
Officer-in-Charge Brigido Simon Jr. to the vacant
possesses the required qualifications. The
position of Admin Officer IV in the Health
determination of who among aspirants with the
Department due to the retirement of Amado minimum statutory qualifications should be preferred
Villafuerte. belongs to the appointing authority and not the Civil
Service Commission. It cannot disallow an
Florentina Eleria, Administrative Officer III of Health appointment because it believes another person is
Department filed a protest with the Merit System better qualified and much less can it direct the
Protection Board (Board) in respect of Abilas appointment of its own choice.
Page | 47
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

In the case at bar, the respondent Commission itself member of the Career Executive Service, was
acknowledged that both petitioner Abila and appointed as "Ministry Legal Counsel - CESO IV in
respondent Eleria are legally qualified for the position the Ministry of Local Government" (now DILG), by
in question. Having made the determination, the then Minister Aquilino Pimentel, Jr. Private
Commission had exhausted its powers and may not respondent's appointment was approved as
act any further except to affirm the validity of permanent by the Civil Service Commission.
petitioner's appointment.
On July 25, 1987, then President Corazon C. Aquino
2. No. the Commission had no authority to revoke promulgated EO 262, reorganizing the DILG. On April
petitioner's appointment because the Commission 8, 1988, then Secretary Luis T. Santos, who
believed that private respondent Eleria was better succeeded Minister Pimentel, designated Nicanor M.
qualified for the position involved; the Commission's Patricio as chief, Legal Service in place of Montesa
acts in this respect constituted an encroachment who, in turn, was directed to report to the office of
upon a discretionary authority vested by law in the the Secretary to perform special assignments.
Quezon City Mayor and not in the Commission.
The Court notes that a vacant position in the Civil Montesa filed a petition for quo warranto against
Service may be filled by promotion, transfer of then Secretary Luis T. Santos and Nicanor Patricio
present employees, reinstatement and re- and the court ruled in favor of Montesa and ordered
employment or appointment of outsiders who have his reinstatement to his former position.
the necessary eligibility. The next-in-rank rule
invoked by respondent Commission to justify its Meanwhile, the Salary Standardization Law took
choice of respondent Eleria over petitioner Abila, effect on July 1, 1989. Pursuant thereto, the position
applies only where a vacancy is filled by promotion, of "Department Service Chiefs," which include the
a process which denotes a scalar ascent of an officer Department Legal Counsel, was reclassified and
to another position higher either in rank or salary. A ranked with "Assistant Bureau Directors" under the
promotion involves a situation quite different from generic position title of "Director III".
the situation in the case at bar where the
appointment of petitioner Abila was effected through In 1994, then Secretary Alunan III, citing as reasons
lateral transfer from a position in one department of the interest of public service and the smooth flow of
the city government to a position of greater operations in the concerned offices, issued DO No.
responsibility in another department of the same 94-370, relieving private respondent of his current
government. duties and responsibilities and reassigning him as
The appointing authority, under the Civil Service "Director III (Assistant Regional Director), Region
Law, is allowed to fill vacancies by promotion, XI," Private respondent, however, did not report to
transfer of present employees, reinstatement, his new assigned position. Instead, he filed a 90-day
reemployment, and appointment of outsiders who sick leave, and upon the expiration thereof, he
have appropriate civil service eligibility, not submitted a memorandum for then acting Secretary
necessarily in that order. There is no legal fiat that a Aguirre, signifying his intention to re-assume his
vacancy must be filled only by promotion; the position as Department Legal Counsel/Chief, Legal
appointing authority is given wide discretion to fill a Services. The memorandum was denied the same
vacancy from among the several alternatives with his motion for reconsideration.
provided for by law. The rule is not mandatory.
Hence, the Civil Service Law provides is that if a Private respondent appealed to the Civil Service
vacancy is filled by a promotion, the person holding Commission but the latter sustained his
the position next in rank thereto "shall be considered reassignment to Region XI, on the ground that the
for promotion. subject reassignment was not violative of the due
process clause of the Constitution or of Montesa's
HON. ALMA G. DE LEON, Chairman, HON. right to security of tenure; the reassignment did not
GAMINDE, HON. ERENETA, entail any reduction in rank or status and that
JR., Commissioners, CSC, and SECRETARY Montesa could be reassigned from one station to
ALUNAN, III, DILG, vs. CA and JACOB F. another without his consent as the rule against
MONTESA unconsented transfer applies only to an officer who
G.R. No. 127182, January 22, 2001 is appointed to a particular station, and not merely
assigned thereto.
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.:
Montesa on the otherhand still did not comply.
FACTS: President Fidel V. Ramos, upon the recommendation
of the Department, issued Administrative Order No.
Respondent Atty. Jacob F. Montesa, who is not a 235, dropping Montesa, Director III. Legal Service,
Career Executive Service Officer (CESO) or a
Page | 48
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

from the roster of public servants for serious neglect


of duty and absences without leave (AWOL). The mere fact that a position belongs to the
Career Service does not automatically
ISSUE: confer security or tenure on its occupant
even if he does not possess the required
Whether a person who lacks the necessary qualifications. Such right will have to
qualification (eligibility) for a public position be depend on the nature of his appointment,
appointed to it in a permanent capacity? which in turn depends on his eligibility or
lack of it. A person who does not have the
RULING: requisite qualifications for the position
cannot be appointed to it in the first place
No. It must be stressed that the position of Ministry or, only as an exception to the rule, may be
Legal Counsel CESO IV is embraced in the Career appointed to it merely in an acting capacity
Executive Service. Under the Integrated in the absence of appropriate eligible. The
Reorganization Plan, appointment thereto shall be appointment extended to him cannot be
made as follows: regarded as permanent even if it may be so
designated.
Appointment to appropriate classes in the
Career Executive Service shall be made by Evidently, private respondent's appointment did not
the President from a list of career executive attain permanency. Not having taken the necessary
eligible recommended by the Board. Such Career Executive Service examination to obtain
appointments shall be made on the basis of requisite eligibility, he did not at the time of his
rank appointment and up to the present, possess the
needed eligibility for a position in the Career
The President may, however, in Executive Service. Consequently, his appointment as
exceptional cases, appoint any person who Ministry Legal Counsel CESO IV/ Department Legal
is not a Career Executive Service eligible; Counsel and/or Director III, was merely temporary.
provided that such appointee shall Such being the case, he could be transferred or
subsequently take the required Career reassigned without violating the constitutionally
Executive Service examination and that he guaranteed right to security of tenure.
shall not be promoted to a higher class until
qualifies in such examination. APPOINTMENT IN THE CAREER EXECUTIVE

At the initial implementation of this Plan, an LUIS MARIO M. GENERAL vs. RAMON S.
incumbent who holds a permanent ROCO
appointment to a position embraced in the G.R. No. 143366. January 29, 2001
Career Executive Service shall continue to 350 SCRA 528
hold his position, but may not advance to a
higher class of position in the Career YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.:
Executive Service unless or until he qualifies
for membership in the Career Executive FACTS:
Service.
Respondent Roco was appointed by then President
Corollarily, the required Career Executive Service Ramos in 1996 as Regional Director of the LTO in
eligibility may be then acquired by passing the CES
Region V, a position equivalent to CES rank level V
examination that will entitle the examinee to a
and later reappointed by then President Estrada to
conferment of a CES eligibility and the inclusion of
his name in the roster of CES eligible the same position in 1999.
In the case at bar, there is no question that Montesa At the time Rocos appointment in 1996 and 1999,
as he admits does not have the required CES he was not a CES eligible. However, during his
eligibility. incumbency in 1999, he was conferred CES eligibility
by the CESB.
The court ruled by citing the case of Achacoso v. On September 7, 1999, petitioner Luis Mario General,
Macaraig, et al., which provides that: who is not a CES eligible, was appointed by President
Estrada as Regional Director of the LTO in Region V,
It is settled that a permanent appointment the same position being occupied by Roco. Pursuant
can be issued only 'to a person who meets thereto, DOTC Undersecretary Coloma as OIC issued
all the requirements for the position to a Memorandum directing General to assume the said
which he is being appointed, including the office immediately and for Roco to report to the
appropriate eligibility prescribed. Office of the Secretary for further instructions.
Page | 49
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

Roco filed before the CA a petition for quo warranto a) CES eligibility; and
which was affirmed by the latter and ordered the b) Appointment to the appropriate CES
nullification of Generals appointment. From this rank.
decision General filed a petition for review against In addition, it must be stressed that the security of
Roco. The latter contends that CES eligibility is tenure of employees in the career executive service
pertains only to rank and not to the office or to the
enough to acquire security of tenure which grants
position to which they may be appointed. Thus, a
him the right to hold the position disputed.
career executive service officer may be transferred
or reassigned from one position to another without
ISSUE: losing his rank which follows him wherever he is
transferred or reassigned.
Whether Career Executive Service (CES) Eligibility is
enough and the appointment to a CES rank is not In the case at bar, there is no question that
necessary to acquire security of tenure. respondent Ramon S. Roco, though a CES eligible,
does not possess the appropriate CES rank, which is
RULING: - CES rank level V, for the position of Regional
Director of the LTO (Region V). Falling short of one
No. Section 27 (1), of the Civil Service Law (Subtitle of the qualifications that would complete his
A, Tittle I, Book V of E.O. No. 292), provides that: membership in the CES, respondent cannot
successfully interpose violation of security of
(1) Permanent status. - A permanent appointment tenure. Accordingly, he could be validly reassigned
shall be issued to a person who meets all the to other positions in the career executive service.
requirements for the position to which he is being
appointed, including the appropriate eligibility __________*************________
prescribed, in accordance with the provisions of law,
rules and standards promulgated in pursuance NOTES:
thereof.
May an elective public official be validly
In the career executive service, the acquisition of appointed or designated to any public office or
security of tenure which presupposes a permanent position during his tenure?
appointment is governed by the rules and regulations
promulgated by the CES Board, thus: Ans.: No elective official shall be eligible for
appointment or designation in any capacity to any
Career Executive Service Eligibility public office or position during his tenure. (Sec. 7, 1
st par., Art. IX-B, 1987 Constitution)
Passing the CES examination entitles the
examinee to a conferment of a CES eligibility
May an appointive public official hold any
and the inclusion of his name in the roster of
CES eligibles. Conferment of CES eligibility is done other office or employment?
by the Board through a formal Board Resolution after
an evaluation is done of the examinees performance Ans.: Unless otherwise allowed by law or by the
in the four stages of the CES eligibility examinations. primary functions of his position, no appointive
official shall hold any other office or employment in
Appointment to CES Rank the Government or any subdivision, agency or
instrumentality thereof, including government-
Upon conferment of a CES eligibility and compliance owned or controlled corporation.
with the other requirements prescribed by the Board, (Sec. 7, 2 nd par., Art. IX-B, 1987 Constitution)
an incumbent of a CES position may qualify for
appointment to a CES rank. Appointment to a CES May the President, Vice-President, Members
rank is made by the President upon the
of the Cabinet, their deputies or assistants
recommendation of the Board. This process
hold any other office or employment?
completes the officials membership in the CES
and most importantly, confers on him security
of tenure in the CES. Ans.: The President, Vice-President, the Members of
the Cabinet, and their deputies or assistants shall
As clearly set forth in the foregoing provisions, two not, unless otherwise provided in this Constitution,
requisites must concur in order that an employee in hold any other office or employment during their
the career executive service may attain security of tenure. (Sec. 13, Art. VII, 1987 Constitution)
tenure, to wit:
Page | 50
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

reference to Section 7, par. (2), Article I-XB insofar


as the appointive officials mentioned therein are
READ WELL : Case of Civil Liberties concerned. The provision relied upon by the
respondents provides:
PROHIBITION: HOLDS DUAL OFFICE
Sec. 7. . . . . .
CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION vs. THE EXECUTIVE Unless otherwise allowed by law or by the primary
SECRETARY functions of his position, no appointive official shall
G.R. No. 83896. February 22, 1991 hold any other office or employment in the
government or any subdivision, agency or
FERNAN, C.J.:
instrumentality thereof, including government-
FACTS: owned or controlled corporations or their
subsidiaries.
The two petitions in this case sought to declare
unconstitutional Executive Order No. 284 issued by ISSUE No. 1:
President Corazon C. Aquino. The assailed law
provides that: Does the prohibition in Section 13, Article VII of the
1987 Constitution insofar as Cabinet members, their
Sec. 1. Even if allowed by law or by the ordinary deputies or assistants are concerned admit of the
functions of his position, a member of the Cabinet, broad exceptions made for appointive officials in
undersecretary or assistant secretary or other general under Section 7, par. (2), Article I-XB?
appointive officials of the Executive Department
may, in addition to his primary position, hold not ISSUE No. 2:
more than two positions in the government and
government corporations and receive the Does the prohibition apply to positions held in ex
corresponding compensation therefor; Provided, officio capacity?
that this limitation shall not apply to ad hoc bodies
or committees, or to boards, councils or bodies of ISSUE No. 3:
which the President is the Chairman.
Can the respondents be obliged to reimburse the
The petitioners alleged that the cited provision of EO perquisites they have received from the offices they
284 contravenes the provision of Sec. 13, Article VII have held pursuant to EO 284?
which declares:
HELD:
The President, Vice-President, the Members of the
Cabinet, and their deputies or assistants shall Number 1:
not, unless otherwise provided in this Constitution,
hold any other office or employment during their No. The intent of the framers of the Constitution was
tenure. They shall not, during said tenure, directly or to impose a stricter prohibition on the President and
indirectly practice any other profession, participate in his official family in so far as holding other offices or
any business, or be financially interested in any employment in the government or elsewhere is
contract with, or in any franchise, or special privilege concerned.
granted by the Government or any subdivision,
agency, or instrumentality thereof, including Although Section 7, Article I-XB already contains a
government-owned or controlled corporations or blanket prohibition against the holding of multiple
their subsidiaries. They shall strictly avoid conflict of offices or employment in the government subsuming
interest in the conduct of their office. both elective and appointive public officials, the
Constitutional Commission should see it fit to
The petitioners maintained that the phrase unless formulate another provision, Sec. 13, Article VII,
otherwise provided in this Constitution used in specifically prohibiting the President, Vice-President,
Section 13 of Article VII meant that the exception members of the Cabinet, their deputies and
must be expressly provided in the Constitution. assistants from holding any other office or
employment during their tenure, unless otherwise
Public respondents, on the other hand, maintain that provided in the Constitution itself. While all other
the phrase unless otherwise provided in the appointive officials in the civil service are allowed to
Constitution in Section 13, Article VII makes hold other office or employment in the government
Page | 51
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

during their tenure when such is allowed by law or rendered. It has been held that in cases where
by the primary functions of their positions, members there is no de jure officer, a de facto officer, who, in
of the Cabinet, their deputies and assistants may do good faith has had possession of the office and has
so only when expressly authorized by the discharged the duties pertaining thereto, is legally
Constitution itself. In other words, Section 7, Article entitled to the emoluments of the office, and may in
I-XB is meant to lay down the general rule applicable an appropriate action recover the salary, fees and
to all elective and appointive public officials and other compensations attached to the office. Any per
employees, while Section 13, Article VII is meant to diem, allowances or other emoluments received by
be the exception applicable only to the President, the the respondents by virtue of actual services rendered
Vice- President, Members of the Cabinet, their in the questioned positions may therefore be
deputies and assistants. retained by them.
The phrase unless otherwise provided in
this Constitution must be given a literal Overall, Executive Order No. 284 is unconstitutional
interpretation to refer only to those particular as it actually allows a member of the cabinet,
instances cited in the Constitution itself, to wit: the undersecretary or assistant secretary or other
Vice-President being appointed as a member of the appointive officials of the Executive Department to
Cabinet under Section 3, par. (2), Article VII; or hold multiple offices or employment in direct
acting as President in those instances provided under contravention of the express mandate of Section 13,
Section 7, pars. (2) and (3), Article VII; and, the Article VII of the 1987 Constitution prohibiting them
Secretary of Justice being ex-officio member of the from doing so, unless otherwise provided in the 1987
Judicial and Bar Council by virtue of Section 8 (1), Constitution itself.
Article VIII.
MA. ANGELINA G. MATIBAG vs. ALFREDO L.
Number 2: BENIPAYO
G.R. No. 149036. April 2, 2002
The prohibition against holding dual or multiple
offices or employment under Section 13, Article VII CARPIO, J.:
of the Constitution must not, however, be construed
as applying to posts occupied by the Executive FACTS:
officials specified therein without additional
compensation in an ex-officio capacity as provided On February 1999, petitioner Matibag was appointed
by law and as required by the primary functions of Acting Director IV of the Comelecs EID by then
said officials office. The reason is that these posts Comelec Chairperson Harriet Demetriou in a
do no comprise any other office within the temporary capacity. On March 2001, respondent
contemplation of the constitutional prohibition but Benipayo was appointed Comelec Chairman together
are properly an imposition of additional duties and with other commissioners in an ad interim
functions on said officials. The term ex-officio means appointment. While on such ad interim appointment,
from office; by virtue of office. Ex-officio likewise respondent Benipayo in his capacity as Chairman
denotes an act done in an official character, or as a issued a Memorandum address transferring
consequence of office, and without any other petitioner to the Law Department. Petitioner
appointment or authority than that conferred by the requested Benipayo to reconsider her relief as
office. The additional duties must not only be Director IV of the EID and her reassignment to the
closely related to, but must be required by the Law Department.
officials primary functions. If the functions required
to be performed are merely incidental, remotely She cited Civil Service Commission Memorandum
related, inconsistent, incompatible, or otherwise Circular No. 7 dated April 10, 2001, reminding heads
alien to the primary function of a cabinet official, of government offices that "transfer and detail of
such additional functions would fall under the employees are prohibited during the election period.
purview of any other office prohibited by the Benipayo denied her request for reconsideration on
Constitution. April 18, 2001, citing COMELEC Resolution No. 3300
dated November 6, 2000, exempting Comelec from
Number 3: the coverage of the said Memo Circular. Petitioner
appealed the denial of her request for
During their tenure in the questioned positions, reconsideration to the COMELEC en banc. She also
respondents may be considered de facto officers and filed an administrative and criminal complaint16 with
as such entitled to emoluments for actual services the Law Department17against Benipayo, alleging
Page | 52
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

that her reassignment violated Section 261 (h) of the harmonized with the Presidents power to extend ad
Omnibus Election Code, COMELEC Resolution No. interim appointments. To hold that the
3258, Civil Service Memorandum Circular No. 07, s. independence of the COMELEC requires the
001, and other pertinent administrative and civil Commission on Appointments to first confirm ad
service laws, rules and regulations. During the interim appointees before the appointees can
pendency of her complaint before the Law assume office will negate the Presidents power to
Department, petitioner filed the instant petition make ad interim appointments. This is contrary to
questioning the appointment and the right to remain the rule on statutory construction to give meaning
in office of Benipayo, Borra and Tuason, as Chairman and effect to every provision of the law. It will also
and Commissioners of the COMELEC, respectively. run counter to the clear intent of the framers of the
Petitioner claims that the ad interim appointments of Constitution.
Benipayo, Borra and Tuason violate the
constitutional provisions on the independence of the VICTOR A. AQUINO vs. CSC and LEONARDA
COMELEC. DELA PAZ
G.R. NO. 92403. April 22, 1992
ISSUE:
MEDIALDEA, J.:
Whether or not the assumption of office by Benipayo,
Borra and Tuason on the basis of the ad interim FACTS:
appointments issued by the President amounts to a
temporary appointment prohibited by Section 1 (2), Private respondent de la Paz was appointed as
Article IX-C of the Constitution. Supply Officer I by the Division Superintendent of
City Schools, and the Civil Service Regional Office
RULING: approved her appointment as permanent. Victor
Aquino questioned her appointment with a
We find petitioners argument without merit. An ad contention that he is more qualified and more
interim appointment is a permanent appointment competent in terms of education, experience and
because it takes effect immediately and can no training. The DECS (Dept of Educ, Culture, and
longer be withdrawn by the President once the Sports) sustained the protest, appointed Aquino as
appointee has qualified into office. The fact that it is the Supply Officer I, and was thereupon issued a
subject to confirmation by the Commission on permanent appointment. De la Paz appealed to the
Appointments does not alter its permanent CSC which revoked the appointment of Aquino.
character. Aquino now seeks to nullify the decision of CSC
revoking his appointment and restoring de la Paz to
The Constitution itself makes an ad interim her position as Supply Officer I.
appointment permanent in character by making it
effective until disapproved by the Commission on
Appointments or until the next adjournment of ISSUE:
Congress. In the instant case, the President did in
fact appoint permanent Commissioners to fill the Whether the CSC committed a grave abuse of
vacancies in the COMELEC, subject only to discretion in revoking Aquino's appointment as it
confirmation by the Commission on Appointments. found de la Paz better qualified
Benipayo, Borra and Tuason were extended
permanent appointments during the recess of RULING:
Congress. They were not appointed or designated in
a temporary or acting capacity, unlike Commissioner No. The SC ruled that although it in the previous
Haydee Yorac in Brillantes vs. Yorac34 and Solicitor cases that ruled that the CSC has no authority to
General Felix Bautista in Nacionalista Party vs. revoke an appointment simply because it (CSC)
Bautista. 35 The ad interim appointments of believed that another person is better qualified than
Benipayo, Borra and Tuason are expressly allowed the appointee for it would constitute an
by the Constitution which authorizes the President, encroachment on the discretion solely vested on the
during the recess of Congress, to make appointing authority.
appointments that take effect immediately.
BUT the situation is different in this case. CSC did not
While the Constitution mandates that the COMELEC direct the appointment of a substitute of its choice.
"shall be independent"36, this provision should be It merely restored the appointment of private
Page | 53
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

respondent who was first appointed to the contested disapproved the promotion of petitioner Victoria to
position. The permanent appointment of de la Paz is the position upon the ground that that promotion
deemed complete. As such, she is entitled to the violated the statutory prohibition against nepotic
protection of the law against unjust approval. appointments. Petitioners moved for
reconsideration, contending that the statutory
The SC also emphasized that the protest must be "for prohibition against nepotism was not applicable to
cause". It is defined as follows: "It means for reasons the appointment of Victoria as General Services
which the law and sound public policy recognized as Officer since the prohibition applies only to original
sufficient warrant for removal, that is legal cause, appointments and not to promotional appointments.
and not merely causes which the appointing power Petitioners believe that because petitioner Victoria
in the exercise of discretion may deem sufficient. It was already in the service of the City Government
is implied that officers may not be removed at the before she married petitioner Mayor, the reason
mere will of those vested with the power of removal, behind the prohibition no longer applied to her
or without any cause. Moreover, the cause must promotional appointment. Petitioners also affirm that
relate to and affect the administration of the office, petitioner Victoria deserves to be promoted to
and must be restricted to something of a substantial General Services Officer, considering her long and
nature directly affecting the rights and interests of faithful service to the City Government. The CSC had
the public." deprived petitioner Victoria of her right to due
process by unilaterally revoking her appointment.
Aquino's protest that he is more qualified than de la Petitioners assert that Victoria can no longer be
Paz does not fall within the meaning of "for cause" removed from the position of General Services
contemplated by Article IX-B, Section 2 par. (3) of Officer without giving her an opportunity to be heard
the 1987 Constitution, neither under Section 19 par. and to answer the charged of nepotism.
(6) of the Civil Service Law (P.D. 807), namely: (1)
that the appointee is not qualified; (2) that the Petitioner Mayor denies that he had been motivated
appointee is not the next-in-rank; and (3) in case of by personal reasons when he appointed his wife to
appointment by transfer, reinstatement, or by the new post. He states that his wife was the most
original appointment, that the protestant is not qualified among the candidates for appointment to
satisfied with the written special reason or reasons that position, she having worked for the City
given by the appointing authority. Government for thirty-two (32) years and being
highly recommended by the OIC-Treasurer of San
Carlos City. It is also claimed by petitioner Mayor that
CITY MAYOR ROGELIO DEBULGADO and his choice of his wife for the position was concurred
VICTORIA DEBULGADO vs. CSC in by the Sangguniang Panglungsod. He further
G.R. No. 111471. September 26, 1994 avers that he had consulted the Field and Regional
Officers of the CSC in Bacolod City, and raised the
FELICIANO, J.: question of applicability of the prohibition against
nepotism to the then proposed promotion of his wife
FACTS:
in one of the seminars conducted by the
Commission's Regional Office held in San Carlos City.
Petitioner Mayor Rogelio Debulgado is the incumbent
According to petitioner Mayor, one Gregorio C.
Mayor of the City of San Carlos, Negros Occidental.
Agdon, a supervising personnel specialist in the
He promoted his wife, petitioner Victoria Debulgado,
Commission's Bacolod Office, informed him that the
as General Services Officer, that is, as head of the
promotional appointment was not covered by the
Office of General Services of the City Government of
prohibition.
San Carlos. Before her promotion, petitioner Victoria
had been in the service of the City Government for
ISSUE:
about thirty-two (32) years and she rose from the
ranks by successively occupying different
Whether prohibition against nepotism apply to
government offices.
promotional appointments.
Public respondent CSC received a letter from
HELD:
Congressman Tranquilino Carmona of the First
District of Negros Occidental, calling attention to the
The prohibition against nepotism applies to BOTH
promotional appointment issued by petitioner Mayor
original and promotional appointments. Both an
in favor of his wife. After investigation, the CSC
original appointment and a promotion are particular
Page | 54
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

species of personnel action, which must comply with and none of the disqualifications. At all events, as the
the prohibition against nepotism. Solicitor General has noted, petitioner Victoria was
afforded an opportunity to be heard when she filed
The original appointment of a civil service employee an MR with the CSC and there challenged the
and all subsequent personnel actions undertaken by disapproval by the Commission.
or in respect of that employee such as promotion,
transfer, reinstatement, reemployment, etc., must Since the promotional appointment in favor of
comply with the Implementing Rules including, of petitioner Victoria was a violation of Section 59, it
course, the prohibition against nepotism was null and void from the beginning. A void
appointment cannot give rise to security of tenure on
The prohibitory norm against nepotism in the public the part of the holder of such appointment.
service is set out in Section 59, Book V of the Revised The CSC is empowered to take appropriate action on
Administrative Code of 1987 (also known as EO 292) all appointments and other personnel actions, e.g.,
under Section 59: promotions. Such power includes the authority to
recall an appointment initially approved in disregard
All appointments in the national, provincial, city and of applicable provisions of Civil Service law and
municipal governments or in any branch or regulations.
instrumentality thereof, including government-
owned or controlled corporations, made in favor of a CONRADO L. DE RAMA VS. COURT OF
relative of the appointing or recommending APPEALS
authority, or of the chief of the bureau or office, or G.R. NO. 131136, February 28, 2001
of the persons exercising immediate supervision over
him, are hereby prohibited. YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.:

FACTS:
The following are exempted from the operation of
the rules on nepotism: (a) persons employed in a
Petitioner Conrado De Rama, upon his assumption of
confidential capacity, (b) teachers, (c) physicians, office to the position of Mayor of Pagbilao Quezon,
and (d) members of the Armed Forces of the wrote a letter dated July 13, 1995 to the Civil Service
Philippines: Provided, however, that in each Commission seeking to recall the appointments of
particular instance full report of such appointment fourteen municipal employees. The contention of
shall be made to the Commission. petitioner was that the appointments of said
employees were midnight appointments of the
It is essential to stress, however, that the prohibition former mayor, Ma. Evelyn Abeja. De Rama contends
applies quite without regard to the actual merits of that the former mayor violated Article VII, Section 15
the proposed appointee and to the good intentions of the 1987 Constitution. The Civil Service
of the appointing or recommending authority, and Commission then denied the petitioners request for
lack of merit. Further, the CSC upheld the validity of
that the prohibition against nepotism in
the appointments on the ground that they are
appointments whether original or promotional, is not
already approved by the Head of CSC Field Office in
intended by the legislative authority to penalize
Lucena City, and for petitioners failure to present
faithful service. The purpose of Section 59 is evidence that would warrant the revocation or recall
precisely to take out of the discretion of the of the said appointed employees. Consequently,
appointing and recommending authority the matter petitioner filed a petition for review before the CA
of appointing or recommending for appointment a arguing that CSC arrive at erroneous conclusions
relative. after it ignored his supplemental to the consolidated
appeal. CA then ruled that no abuse of power of
The promotional appointment of petitioner Victoria appointment on the part of outgoing mayor, and
as formerly approved by the CSC did not vest in her affirming the decision of CSC in its quasi-judicial
a right to that position, therefore, she was not capacity. Hence, the instant petition for review to the
deprived of due process when she was terminated. Supreme Court`
Victoria was not deprived due process as there were
ISSUE:
no administrative charges in respect of which she
would have been entitled to notice and hearing. The WON CSC erred in not upholding the petitioners
CSC, in approving or disapproving an appointment, recall of the appointments of private respondents?
only examines the conformity of the appointment
with applicable provisions of law and whether the
appointee possesses all the minimum qualifications
Page | 55
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

RULING: ISSUE:

No. The court ruled that when petitioner brought the Whether PNRC is a Government Owned and
matter of recalling the appointments of the fourteen Controlled Corporation.
employees before the CSC, the only reason he cited
was that they were midnight appointments that are RULING:
forbidden within the contemplation of Article VII,
Section 15 of the 1987 Constitution. Accordingly, the Yes, PNRC is a government owned and controlled
court provides that the ground for recall of the corporation, with an original charter under Republic
appointments validly followed by CSC are that (1) the Act No. 95, as amended.
rules on screening of applicants based on adopted
criteria were not followed; (2) there was no proper The test to determine whether a corporation is
posting of notice of vacancy; and (3) the merit and government owned or controlled, or private in nature
fitness requirements set by the civil service rules is simple. Is it created by its own charter for the
were not observed. However, such were not exercise of a public function, or by incorporation
presented by the petitioner. under the general corporation law? Those with
special charters are government corporations subject
The court, furthermore upheld, that upon the to its provisions, and its employees are under the
issuance of an appointment and the jurisdiction of the Civil Service Commission, and are
appointees assumption of the position in the compulsory members of the Government Service
civil service, he acquires a legal right which Insurance System. The PNRC was not "impliedly
cannot be taken away either by revocation of converted to a private corporation" simply because
the appointment or removal except for cause its charter was amended to vest in it the authority to
and with previous notice and hearing. secure loans, be exempted from payment of all
Moreover, it is well-settled that the person assuming duties, taxes, fees and other charges of all kinds on
a position in the civil service under a completed all importations and purchases for its exclusive use,
appointment acquires a legal, not just an equitable on donations for its disaster relief work and other
right to the position. This right is protected not only services and in its benefits and fund raising drives,
by statute, but by the Constitution as well, which and be allotted one lottery draw a year by the
cannot be taken away by either revocation or Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office for the support
removal unless a valid cause provided there is a of its disaster relief operation in addition to its
previous notice and hearing. existing lottery draws for blood program.

BALTAZAR CAMPOREDONDO V. NLRC Having served in the Philippine National Red


GR. NO. 129049, AUGUST 6, 1999 Cross for a number of years since his initial
employment, he must know that it is a government
PARDO, J.: corporation with its own charter and that he was
covered by compulsory membership in the
FACTS: Government Service Insurance System, which is why
he could apply, as he did, for "early" retirement from
Petitioner was the administrator of the Surigao del the service under Presidential Decree No. 1146 or
Norte Chapter, Philippine National Red Cross (PNRC) Republic Act No. 1616.
until his early retirement. Petitioner alleged that his
retirement was forced after he was required to CSC AND PAGCOR VS. RAFAEL M. SALAS
restitute shortages and unremitted collections in the GR NO. 123708, June 19, 1997
total sum of P135,927.78 as determined by the field
auditor of the PNRC. REGALADO, J.:

Petitioner filed with the NLRC, Sub-Regional DOCTRINE: The nature of the position, as may be
Arbitration Branch X, Butuan City, a complaint for ascertained by the court in case of conflict, which
illegal dismissal, damages and underpayment of finally determines whether a position is primarily
wages against the PNRC and its key officials. confidential, policy-determining or highly technical.

PNRC moved for the dismissal of the complaint for FACTS:


lack of Jurisdiction over the subject matter of the
case because PNRC is a Government Corporation 1. Respondent Salas was appointed by PAGCOR
whose employees are members of the GSIS and Chairman as Internal Security Staff [ISS] member
embraced within the Civil Service Law and and assigned to the casino at Manila Pavilion Hotel.
Regulations.

Page | 56
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

2. His employment was terminated for loss of determines whether a position is primarily
confidence after a covert investigation of the confidential, policy determining, or highly technical.
Intelligence division of PAGCOR. Executive pronouncements [like PD 1869] are merely
a. From affidavits of 2 customers of PAGCOR who initial determinations that are not conclusive in case
were used as gunners by the respondent, the latter of conflict.
was allegedly engaged in proxy betting.
b. 2 polygraph tests show corroborative and 5. Piero doctrine -- notwithstanding any statutory
unfavorable results. classification to the contrary, it is still the nature of
3. Salas submitted a letter of appeal to the Chairman the position, as may be ascertained by the court in
and the Board of Directors of PAGCOR requesting for case of conflict, which finally determines whether a
reinvestigation since he was not given an opportunity position is primarily confidential, policy-determining
to be heard. It was DENIED. or highly technical -- is still controlling with the
4. The appeal with the Merit Systems Protection advent of the 1987 Constitution and the
Board was denied on the ground that as a Administrative Code of 1987, Book V of which deals
confidential employee, respondent was not specifically with the Civil Service Commission,
dismissed from service but his term of office expired. considering that from these later enactments, in
CSC affirmed the decision of MSPB. defining positions which are policy-determining,
5. CA- Salas is not a confidential employee, hence he primarily confidential or highly technical, the phrase
may not be dismissed on the ground of loss of "in nature" was deleted
confidence.
a. CA applied proximity rule a. Submission that PAGCOR employees have been
b. Sec. 16 of PD 1869 has been superseded and declared confidential appointee by operation of law
repealed by Section 2(1), Article IX-B of the must be rejected.
Constitution.
6. The primary purpose of the framers of the
ISSUE/S: Constitution in providing for declaration of a position
as policy determining, highly confidential, or highly
WON respondent Salas is a confidential employee. technical is to exempt these categories from
NO. competitive examination as a means for determining
merit and fitness. a. These positions are covered by
RATIO: security of tenure although they are considered
noncompetitive only un the sense that appointees do
1. The power to declare a position as policy not have to undergo examinations to determine
determining, primarily confidential or highly technical merit and fitness.
as defined therein has subsequently been codified
and incorporated in Section 12(9), Book V of 7. CA Correctly applied proximity rule. Where the
Executive Order No. 292 or the Administrative Code position occupied is remote from that of the
of 1987. a. Serves to bolster the validity of the appointing authority, the element of trust between
categorization made under Section 16 of Presidential them is no longer predominant. a. Position of the
Decree No. 1869. Such classification is not absolute private respondent does not involve such close
and all encompassing. intimacy between him and the appointing authority.

2. Two recognized instances when a position may be FACTORS:


considered primarily confidential: a. When the
President, upon recommendation of the CSC, has i. Routine duties of Salas [check full text] ii. ISS
declared the position to be primarily confidential; b. members do not directly report to the office of the
In the absence of such declaration, when by the chairman in the performance of their official duties.
nature of the functions of the office there exists Subject to the control and supervision of an Area
close intimacy between the appointee and the Supervisor. iii. Position of ISS belongs to the bottom
appointing power which insures freedom of level salary scale of the corporation, being in pay
intercourse without embarrassment or freedom of class 2 level only [pay class 12 being the highest]
misgivings of betrayals of personal trust or DISPOSITIVE: CA order affirmed. Salas not a
confidential matters of state. confidential employee.

3. It would seem that the case falls under the first CSC vs. PEDRO O. DACOYCOY
category by virtue of Sec. 16 of PD 1869, but the G.R. No. 135805. April 29, 1999
second category shows otherwise.
PARDO, J.:
4. Since the enactment of Civil Service Act of 1959,
it is the nature of the position which finally
FACTS:
Page | 57
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

O. Dacoycoy, who was the school administrator. He


George P. Suan, a Citizens Crime Watch Vice- authorized Mr. Daclag to recommend the
President, filed with the Civil Service Commission, appointment of first level employees under his
Quezon City, a complaint against Pedro O. Dacoycoy, immediate supervision. Then Mr. Daclag
for habitual drunkenness, misconduct and nepotism. recommended the appointment of respondents two
After the fact-finding investigation, the Civil Service sons and placed them under respondents immediate
Regional Office found a prima facie case against supervision serving as driver and utility worker of the
respondent. Accordingly, the Civil Service school. Both positions are career positions. Thus, the
Commission conducted a formal investigation, and, unseen but obvious hand of respondent Dacoycoy
promulgated its resolution finding no substantial was behind the appointing or recommending
evidence to support the charge of habitual authority in the appointment of his two sons. Clearly,
drunkenness and misconduct. However, the he is guilty of nepotism.
Commission found respondent Pedro O. Dacoycoy
guilty of nepotism on two counts as a result of the ISSUE #2:
appointment of his two sons, Rito and Ped Dacoycoy,
as driver and utility worker, respectively, and their Whether the Civil Service Law does not contemplate
assignment under his immediate supervision and a review of decisions exonerating officers or
control as the Vocational School Administrator employees from administrative charges.
Balicuatro College of Arts and Trades, and imposed
on him the penalty of dismissal from the service.The RULING:
Court of Appeals promulgated its decision reversing
and setting aside the decision of the Civil Service No. As an aggrieved party, The Civil Service
Commission, ruling that respondent did not appoint Commission may appeal the decision of the Court of
or recommend his two sons Rito and Ped, and, Appeals to the Supreme Court. When the Court of
hence, was not guilty of nepotism. Appeals reversed the decision of the Civil Service
Commission and held respondent not guilty of
ISSUE #1: nepotism. Who now may appeal the decision of the
Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court? Certainly not
Whether the service of the respondent should have the respondent, who was declared not guilty of the
dismissed. charge. Nor the complainant George P. Suan, who
was merely a witness for the government.
RULING: Consequently, the Civil Service Commission has
become the party adversely affected by such ruling,
Yes. Under the definition of nepotism, one is guilty which seriously prejudices the civil service system.
of nepotism if an appointment is issued in favor of a By this ruling, the Court expressly abandon and
relative within the third civil degree of consanguinity overrule extant jurisprudence that the phrase party
or affinity of any of the following: a) appointing adversely affected by the decision refers to the
authority; b) recommending authority; c) chief of the government employee against whom the
bureau or office, and d) person exercising immediate administrative case is filed for the purpose of
supervision over the appointee. To constitute a disciplinary action which may take the form of
violation of the law, it suffices that an appointment suspension, demotion in rank or salary, transfer,
is extended or issued in favor of a relative within the removal or dismissal from office and not included are
third civil degree of consanguinity or affinity of the cases where the penalty imposed is suspension for
chief of the bureau or office, or the person exercising not more then thirty (30) days or fine in an amount
immediate supervision over the appointee.While It is not exceeding thirty days salary or when the
true that he did not appoint or recommend his two respondent is exonerated of the charges, there is no
sons to the positions of driver and utility worker in occasion for appeal. In other words, the Court
the Balicuatro College of Arts and Trades, However, overrule prior decisions holding that the Civil Service
it was respondent Dacoycoy who certified that funds Law does not contemplate a review of decisions
are available for the proposed appointment of Rito exonerating officers or employees from
Dacoycoy and even rated his performance as very administrative charges.
satisfactory. On the other hand, his son Ped stated
in his position description form that his father was ISSUE #3:
his next higher supervisor. The circumvention of the
ban on nepotism is quite obvious. Unquestionably, Whether the Court of Appeals reliance on Debulgado
Mr. Daclag was a subordinate of respondent Pedro case may prosper.
Page | 58
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

RULING: February 20, 1989, Beja filed petition for certiorari


with preliminary injunction before the Regional Trial
No. The Court of Appeals reliance on Debulgado vs. Court of Misamis Oriental. Two days later, he filed
Civil Service Commission, to support its ruling is with the ABB a manifestation and motion to suspend
misplaced. The issues in Debulgado are whether a the hearing of administrative case on account of the
promotional appointment is covered by the pendency of the certiorari proceeding before the
court. AAB denied the motion and continued with the
prohibition against nepotism or the prohibition
hearing of the administrative case. Thereafter, Beja
applies only to original appointments to the civil
moved for the dismissal of the certiorari case and
service, and whether the Commission had gravely proceeded to file before the Court for a petition for
abused its discretion in recalling and disapproving certiorari with preliminary injunction and/or
the promotional appointment given to petitioner temporary restraining order.
after the Commission had earlier approved that
appointment. Debulgado never even impliedly ISSUE:
limited the coverage of the ban on nepotism to only
the appointing or recommending authority for Whether or not the Administrative Action Board of
appointing a relative. Precisely, in Debulgado, the DOTC has jurisdiction over administrative cases
Court emphasized that Section 59 means exactly involving personnel below the rank of Assistant
what it says in plain and ordinary language: x x x The General Manager of the Philippine Ports Authority, an
attached agency of DOTC
public policy embodied in Section 59 is clearly
fundamental in importance, and the Court had
RULING:
neither authority nor inclination to dilute that
important public policy by introducing a qualification
The PPA General Manager is the disciplining
here or a distinction there.
authority who may, by himself and without the
approval of the PPA Board of Directors, subject a
FIDENCIO Y. BEJA, SR. vs. CA
respondent in an administrative case to preventive
G.R. No. 97149. March 31, 1992
suspension. His disciplining powers are sanctioned
not only by Sec.8 of PD no. 857 but also by Sec. 37
ROMERO, J.:
of PD no. 807 granting the heads of agencies the
FACTS: Jurisdiction to investigate and decide matters
involving disciplinary actions against officers and
Fidencio Beja Sr. an employee of Philippine ports employees in the PPA. With respect to the issue, the
authority, hired as Arrastre supervisor in 1975 and Court qualifiedly rules in favor of the petitioner. The
later on appointed as terminal supervisor in 1988. On PPA was created through PD no. 505 dated July
October 21, 1988, the General Manager, Rogelio A. 1974. Under the Law, the corporate powers of the
Dayan filed administrative case against Beja Sr. and PPA were vested in a governing Board of Directors
Villaluz for grave dishonesty. Grave misconduct known as the Philippine Ports Authority Council. Sec.
willful violation of reasonable office rules and 5(i) of the same decree gave the council the power
regulations and conduct prejudicial to the best to appoint, discipline and remove, and determine
interest of the service.
the composition of the technical staff of the authority
and other personnel. On December 23, 1975, PD
Consequently, they were preventively suspended for
the charges. After preliminary investigation no. 505 was substituted by PD no. 857 sec. 4(a)
conducted by the district attorney for region X, thereof created the Philippine Ports Authority which
administrative case was considered closed for lack of would be attached to the then Department of Public
merit. Works, Transportation and Communication. When
Executive order no. 125 dated January 30, 1987
On December 13, 1988 another administrative case reorganizing the Ministry of Transportation and
was filed against Beja by the PPA manager also for Communication was issued, the PPA retained its
dishonesty grave misconduct violation of office rules attached status. Administrative Code of 1987
and regulations, conduct prejudicial to the best classified PPA as an attached agency to the DOTC.
interest of the service and for being notoriously Book IV of the Administrative Code of 1987, the
undesirable. Beja was also placed under preventive other two being supervision and control and
suspension pursuant to sec. 412 of PD No. 807. The
administrative supervision, Attachment is defined
case was redocketed and thereafter, the PPA
as the lateral relationship between the department
indorsed it to the AAB for appropriate action. The
AAB proceeded to hear the case and gave Beja an or its equivalent and the attached agency or
opportunity to present evidence. However, on corporation for purposes of policy and program

Page | 59
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

coordination. An attached agency has a larger applications for leave of absence and, therefore,
measure of independence from the Department to reduced the penalty imposed on them to reprimand
which it is attached than one which is under and ordered them reinstated to their former
departmental supervision and control or positions.
administrative supervision. This is borne out by the
lateral relationship between the Department and Respondents filed a petition for certiorari under Rule
the attached agency. The attachment is merely for 65 in this Court. Pursuant to Revised Administrative
policy and program coordination. With respect to Circular No. 1-95, the case was referred to the Court
administrative matters, the independence of an of Appeals which, on September 3, 1996, rendered a
attached agency from the department control and decision reversing it insofar as the CSC ordered the
supervision is furthermore reinforced by the fact that suspension of Nicanor Margallo. The appellate court
even an agency under a Departments administrative found him guilty of violation of reasonable office
supervision is free from Departmental interference rules and regulations only and imposed on him the
with respect to appointments and other personnel penalty of reprimand.
actions in accordance with the decentralization of
personnel functions under the administrative Code the Court of Appeals, while maintaining its finding
of 1987. The Law impliedly grants the general that private respondents were guilty of violation of
Manager with the approval of the PPA board of reasonable office rules and regulations for which
Directors the power to investigate its personnel they should be reprimanded, ruled that private
below the rank of Assistant Manager who may be respondents were entitled to the payment of salaries
charged with an administrative offense. During such during their suspension beyond ninety (90) days.
investigation, the PPA General Manager, may subject
the employee concerned to preventive suspension. Petitioner contends that the administrative
The investigation should be conducted in accordance investigation of respondents was concluded within
with the procedure set out in Sec. 38 of PD no. 807. the 90-day period of preventive suspension, implying
that the continued suspension of private respondents
RICARDO T. GLORIA vs. CA is due to their appeal, hence, the government should
GR No. 131012, April 21, 1999 not be held answerable for payment of their salaries.
Moreover, petitioner lays so much store by the fact
MENDOZA, J.: that, under the law, private respondents are
considered under preventive suspension during the
FACTS: period of their appeal and, for this reason, are not
entitled to the payment of their salaries during their
Private respondents are public school teachers. On suspension.
various dates, during the teachers strikes, they did
not report for work. For this reason, they were ISSUE:
administratively charged with (1) grave misconduct,
(2) gross neglect of duty, (3) gross violation of Civil Whether the teachers are entitled to backwages for
Service Law Rules and Regulations and reasonable the period pending their appeal if they are
office regulations, (4) refusal to perform official duty, subsequently exonerated?
(5) gross insubordination, (6) conduct prejudicial to
the best interest of the service, and (7) absence HELD:
without leave (AWOL), and placed under preventive
suspension. The investigation was concluded before Yes, they are entitled to backwages.
the lapse of their 90-day suspension and private
respondents were found guilty as charged. The court ruled that there are thus two kinds of
Respondent Nicanor Margallo was ordered dismissed preventive suspension of civil service employees who
from the service, while respondents Amparo Abad, are charged with offenses punishable by removal or
Virgilia Bandigas, and Elizabeth Somebang were suspension: (1) preventive suspension pending
ordered suspended for 6 months. investigation (51) and (2) preventive suspension
pending appeal if the penalty imposed by the
On appeal, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) disciplining authority is suspension or dismissal and,
affirmed the decision of the MSPB with respect to after review, the respondent is exonerated (47(4)).
Margallo, but found the other three (Abad, Bandigas,
and Somebang) guilty only of violation of reasonable preventive suspension pending appeal is actually
office rules and regulations by failing to file punitive although it is in effect subsequently
Page | 60
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

considered illegal if respondent is exonerated and of their salaries even if they are exonerated, they are
the administrative decision finding him guilty is entitled to compensation for the period of their
reversed. Hence, he should be reinstated with full suspension pending appeal if eventually they are
pay for the period of the suspension. Thus, 47(4) found innocent. Preventive suspension pending
states that respondent shall be considered as under investigation x x x is not a penalty but only a means
preventive suspension during the pendency of the of enabling the disciplining authority to conduct an
appeal in the event he wins. On the other hand, if unhampered investigation. On the other hand,
his conviction is affirmed, i.e., if he is not exonerated, preventive suspension pending appeal is actually
the period of his suspension becomes part of the final punitive although it is in effect subsequently
penalty of suspension or dismissal. considered illegal if respondent is exonerated and
the administrative decision finding him guilty is
Private respondents were exonerated of all charges reversed. Hence, he should be reinstated with full
against them for acts connected with the teachers pay for the period of the suspension.
strike of September and October 1990. Although
they were absent from work, it was not because of REPUBLIC ACT 3019 (ANTI-GRAFT AND
the strike. For being absent without leave, they were CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT) Section 13 (See
held liable for violation of reasonable office rules and Aguinaldo and Mojica Case)
regulations for which the penalty is a reprimand.
Section 13. Suspension and loss of benefits. Any
NOTES: public officer against whom any criminal prosecution
under a valid information under this Act or under the
Discuss the kinds of preventive suspension under the provisions of the Revised Penal Code on bribery is
Civil Service Law. When may a civil service employee pending in court, shall be suspended from office.
placed under preventive suspension be entitled to Should he be convicted by final judgment, he shall
compensation? Held: There are two kinds of lose all retirement or gratuity benefits under any law,
preventive suspension of civil service employees who but if he is acquitted, he shall be entitled to
are charged with offenses punishable by removal or reinstatement and to the salaries and benefits which
suspension: he failed to receive during suspension, unless in the
meantime administrative proceedings have been
(1) preventive suspension pending investigation filed against him.
(Sec. 51, Civil Service Law, EO No. 292) and
(2) preventive suspension pending appeal if the MAYOR ALVIN B. GARCIA vs. ARTURO C.
penalty imposed by the disciplining authority is MOJICA
suspension or dismissal and, after review, the G.R. No. 139043. September 10, 1999
respondent is exonerated (Section 47, par. 4, Civil
Service Law, EO No. 292). QUISUMBING, J.:

Preventive suspension pending investigation is not a FACTS:


penalty. It is a measure intended to enable the
disciplining authority to investigate charges against On May 7, 1998, petitioner, in his capacity as Cebu
respondent by preventing the latter from intimidating City mayor, signed a contract with F.E. Zuellig for the
or in any way influencing witnesses against him. If supply of asphalt to the city. The contract covers the
the investigation is not finished and a decision is not period 1998-2001, which was to commence on
rendered within that period, the suspension will be September 1998 upon F.E. Zuelligs first delivery.
lifted and the respondent will automatically be Sometime in March 1999, news reports came out
reinstated. If after investigation respondent is found regarding the alleged anomalous purchase of asphalt
innocent of the charges and is exonerated, he should by Cebu City, through the contract signed by
be reinstated. However, no compensation was due petitioner. This prompted the Office of the
for the period of preventive suspension pending Ombudsman (Visayas) to conduct an inquiry into the
investigation. The Civil Service Act of 1959 (R.A. No. matter.
2260) providing for compensation in such a case
once the respondent was exonerated was revised in Respondent Jesus Rodrigo T. Tagaan, special
1975 and the provision on the payment of salaries prosecution officer of the Office of the Ombudsman,
during suspension was deleted. But although it is was assigned to conduct the inquiry, docketed as
held that employees who are preventively suspended INQ-VIS-99-0132. After investigation, he
pending investigation are not entitled to the payment recommended that the said inquiry be upgraded to
Page | 61
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

criminal and administrative cases against petitioner liability therefore, and it is our considered view that
and the other city officials involved. Respondent he may not.
Arturo C. Mojica, Deputy Ombudsman for the
Visayas, approved this recommendation 2. No. There is nothing in the LGC to indicate that it
has repealed, whether expressly or impliedly, the
ISSUES: pertinent provisions of the Ombudsman Act. The two
statutes on the specific matter in question are not so
1. Whether Garcia may be held administratively inconsistent, let alone irreconcilable, as to compel us
liable. to only uphold one and strike down the other. The
decision of the Ombudsman (6 month suspension)
2. Whether the Ombudsman was stripped of its will prevail over the LGC (60day suspension) if the
powers by virtue of the Local Government Code. evidence of guilt is strong. The power to preventively
suspend is available not only to the Ombudsman but
RULING: also to the Deputy Ombudsman.

1. No. As previously held, a reelected local official Discuss the power of Ombudsman to conduct
may not be held administratively accountable for administrative investigations, and to impose
misconduct committed during his prior term of preventive suspension.
office. The rationale is that when the electorate put
him back into office, it is presumed that it did so with Worth stressing, to resolve the present controversy,
full knowledge of his life and character, including his we must recall that the authority of the Ombudsman
past misconduct. If, armed with such knowledge, it to conduct administrative investigations is mandated
still reelects him, then such is considered a by no less than the Constitution. x x x R.A. 6770, the
condonation of his past misdeeds. Ombudsman Law, further grants the Office of the
Ombudsman the statutory power to conduct
However, in the present case, respondents point out administrative investigations. X x x Section 21 of R.A.
that the contract entered into by petitioner with F.E. 6770 names the officials subject to the
Zuellig was signed just 4 days before the date of the Ombudsmans disciplinary authority x x x. Petitioner
elections. It was not made an issue during the is an elective local official accused of grave
election, and so the electorate could not be said to misconduct and dishonesty. That the Office of the
have voted for petitioner with knowledge of this Ombudsman may conduct an administrative
particular aspect of his life and character. investigation into the acts complained of, appears
clear from the foregoing provisions of R.A. 6770.
Petitioner can no longer be held administratively However, the question of whether or not the
liable for an act done during his previous term. The Ombudsman may conduct an investigation over a
agreement between petitioner and F.E. Zuellig was particular act or omission, is different from the
perfected on the date the contract was signed, question of whether or not petitioner, after
during petitioners prior term. At that moment, investigation, may be held administratively liable.
petitioner already acceded to the terms of the This distinction ought here to be kept in mind, even
contract, including stipulations now alleged to be as we must also take note that the power to
prejudicial to the city government. Thus, any investigate is distinct from the power to suspend
culpability petitioner may have in signing the preventively an erring public officer. Likewise worthy
contract already became extant on the day the of note, the power of the Office of the Ombudsman
contract was signed. It hardly matters that the to preventively suspend an official subject to its
deliveries under the contract are supposed to have administrative investigation is provided by specific
been made months later. provision of law. X x x We have previously
interpreted the phrase under his authority to mean
While petitioner can no longer be held that the Ombudsman can preventively suspend all
administratively liable for signing the contract with F. officials under investigation by his office, regardless
E. Zuellig, this should not prejudice the filing of any of the branch of government in which they are
case, other than administrative, against petitioner. employed (Buenaseda v. Flavier, 226 SCRA 645, 654
The ruling does not mean the total exoneration of [1993]), excepting of course those removable by
petitioners wrongdoing, if any, that might have been impeachment, members of Congress and the
committed in signing the subject contract. The ruling Judiciary. The power to preventively suspend is
is now limited to the question of his administrative available not only to the Ombudsman but also to the
Deputy Ombudsman. This is the clear import of
Page | 62
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

Section 24 of R.A. 6770 above cited. There can be RODOLFO AGUINALDO VS. LUIS SANTOS
no question in this case as to the power and authority G.R. No. 94115 August 21, 1992
of respondent Deputy Ombudsman to issue an order
of preventive suspension against an official like the NOCON, J.:
petitioner, to prevent that official from using his
office to intimidate or influence witnesses (Gloria v. FACTS:
CA, et al., G.R. No. 131012, April 21, 1999, p. 7, 306
SCRA 287) or to tamper with records that might be Aguinaldo was the duly elected Governor of the
vital to the prosecution of the case against him province of Cagayan. After the December 1989 coup
(Yasay, Jr. v. Desierto, et al., G.R. No. 134495, dtat was crushed, DILG Secretary Santos sent a
December 28, 1998, p. 9, 300 SCRA 494). In our telegram & letter to Governor Aguinaldo requiring
view, the present controversy simply boils down to him to show cause why he should not be suspended
this pivotal question: Given the purpose of or removed from office for disloyalty to the Republic.
preventive suspension and the circumstances of this A sworn complaint was also filed by Mayors of
case, did respondent Deputy Ombudsman commit a several municipalities in Cagayan against Aguinaldo
grave abuse of discretion when he set the period of for acts committed during the coup. Aguinaldo
preventive suspension at six months? Preventive denied being privy to the planning of the coup or
suspension under Sec. 24, R.A. 6770 x x x may be actively participating in its execution, though he
imposed when, among other factors, the evidence of admitted that he was sympathetic to the cause of the
guilt is strong. The period for which an official may rebel soldiers.
be preventively suspended must not exceed six The Secretary suspended petitioner from office for
months. In this case, petitioner was preventively 60 days from notice, pending the outcome of the
suspended and ordered to cease and desist from formal investigation. Later, the Secretary rendered a
holding office for the entire period of six months, decision finding petition guilty as charged and
which is the maximum provided by law. The ordering his removal from office. Vice-Governor
determination of whether or not the evidence of guilt Vargas was installed as Governor. Aguinaldo
is strong as to warrant preventive suspension rests appealed.
with the Ombudsman (Nera v. Garcia, 106 Phil. 1031
[1960]; others omitted.). The discretion as regards Aguinaldo filed a petition for certiorari and
the period of such suspension also necessarily prohibition with preliminary mandatory injunction
belongs to the Ombudsman, except that he cannot and/or restraining order with the SC, assailing the
extend the period of suspension beyond that decision of respondent Secretary of Local
provided by law (Castillo-Co v. Barbers, supra.). But, Government. Petitioner argued that: (1) that the
in our view, both the strength of the evidence to power of respondent Secretary to suspend or remove
warrant said suspension and the propriety of the local government official under Section 60, Chapter
length or period of suspension imposed on petitioner IV of B.P. Blg. 337 was repealed by the 1987
are properly raised in this petition for certiorari and Constitution; (2) that since respondent Secretary no
prohibition. X x x X x x Given these findings, we longer has power to suspend or remove petitioner,
cannot say now that there is no evidence sufficiently the former could not appoint respondent Melvin
strong to justify the imposition of preventive Vargas as Governor; and (3) the alleged act of
suspension against petitioner. But considering its disloyalty committed by petitioner should be proved
purpose and the circumstances in the case brought by proof beyond reasonable doubt, and not be a
before us, it does appear to us that the imposition of mere preponderance of evidence, because it is an act
the maximum period of six months is unwarranted. punishable as rebellion under the Revised Penal
X x x [G]ranting that now the evidence against Code.
petitioner is already strong, even without conceding
that initially it was weak, it is clear to us that the While the case was pending before the SC, Aguinaldo
maximum six-month period is excessive and filed his certificate of candidacy for the position of
definitely longer than necessary for the Ombudsman Governor of Cagayan. Three petitions for
to make its legitimate case against petitioner. We disqualification were filed against him on the ground
must conclude that the period during which that he had been removed from office.
petitioner was already preventively suspended, has
been sufficient for the lawful purpose of preventing The Comelec granted the petition. Later, this was
petitioner from hiding and destroying needed reversed on the ground that the decision of the
documents, or harassing and preventing witnesses Secretary has not yet attained finality and is still
who wish to appear against him pending review with the Court. As Aguinaldo won by
Page | 63
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

a landslide margin in the elections, the resolution


paved the way for his eventual proclamation as What is the doctrine of forgiveness or
Governor of Cagayan. condonation? Does it apply to pending
criminal cases?
ISSUES:
Held:
1. WON petitioner's re-election to the position of
Governor of Cagayan has rendered the 1. A public official cannot be removed for
administration case moot and academic administrative misconduct committed during a prior
2. WON the Secretary has the power to suspend or term, since his re-election to office operates as a
remove local government officials as alter ego of the condonation of the officers previous misconduct to
President the extent of cutting off the right to remove him
therefor. The foregoing rule, however, finds no
RULING: application to criminal cases pending against
petitioner. (Aguinaldo v. Santos, 212 SCRA 768,
1. Yes. Aguinaldos re-election to the position of 773 [1992])
Governor of Cagayan has rendered the
administrative case pending moot and academic. It 2. A reelected local official may not be held
appears that after the canvassing of votes, petitioner administratively accountable for misconduct
garnered the most number of votes among the committed during his prior term of office. The
candidates for governor of Cagayan province. The rationale for this holding is that when the electorate
rule is that a public official cannot be removed for put him back into office, it is presumed that it did so
administrative misconduct committed during a prior with full knowledge of his life and character,
term, since his re-election to office operates as a including his past misconduct. If, armed with such
condonation of the officer's previous misconduct to knowledge, it still reelects him, then such reelection
the extent of cutting off the right to remove him is considered a condonation of his past misdeeds.
therefor. The foregoing rule, however, finds no (Mayor Alvin B. Garcia v. Hon. Arturo C.
application to criminal cases pending against Mojica, et al., G.R. No. 139043, Sept. 10, 1999
petitioner for acts he may have committed during the [Quisumbing])
failed coup.

2. Yes. The power of the Secretary to remove local SECOND SET OF CASES LAW ON PUBLIC
government officials is anchored on both the OFFICERS
Constitution and a statutory grant from the
legislative branch. The constitutional basis is
provided by Articles VII (17) and X (4) of the 1987 CAYO G. GAMOGAMO vs. PNOC SHIPPING
Constitution which vest in the President the power of AND TRANSPORT CORP.
control over all executive departments, bureaus and G.R. No. 141707. May 7, 2002
offices and the power of general supervision over
local governments. It is a constitutional doctrine that DAVIDE, JR., C.J.:
the acts of the department head are presumptively
the acts of the President unless expressly rejected by FACTS:
him. Furthermore, it cannot be said that BP337 was Petitioner was first employed with the DOH as Dental
repealed by the effectivity of the present Constitution Aide and later on promoted to the position of Dentist
as both the 1973 and 1987 Constitution grants to the 1. He remained employed at the DOH for fourteen
legislature the power and authority to enact a local years until he resigned on 2 November 1977.
government code, which provides for the manner of
removal of local government officials. Moreover, in On 9 November 1977, petitioner was hired as
company dentist by Luzon Stevedoring Corporation
Bagabuyo et al. vs. Davide, Jr., et al., this court had
(LUSTEVECO), a private domestic
the occasion to state that B.P. Blg. 337 remained in
corporation. Subsequently, Respondent PNOC
force despite the effectivity of the present acquired and took over the shipping business of
Constitution, until such time as the proposed Local LUSTEVECO, and on 1 August 1979, petitioner was
Government Code of 1991 is approved. The power among those who opted to be absorbed by the
of the DILG secretary to remove local elective Respondent. Thus, he continued to work as company
government officials is found in Secs. 60 and 61 of dentist and assumed without interruption petitioners
BP 337.
Page | 64
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

service credits with LUSTEVECO, but it did not incorporated under the General Corporation Law are
assume petitioners service credits with the DOH. not within its coverage.
Consequently, Respondent was not bound by the
On 10 June 1993, President Ramos issued
opinion of the Civil Service Commission of 18 May
memorandum approving privatization of PNOC
subsidiaries. Accordingly, respondent implemented a 1993.
Manpower Reduction Program wherein under this
program, retrenched employees shall receive a two Petitioners contention that the principle of tacking of
month pay for every tear of service. Petitioner creditable service is mandated by Republic Act No.
requested to be included in the next retrenchment 7699 is baseless. Section 3 of Republic Act No. 7699
schedule but it was denied for a reason that he was reads:
holding a permanent position and that he was SEC 3. Provisions of any general or special law or
already due for mandatory retirement under his rules and regulations to the contrary
retirement plan. notwithstanding, a covered worker who transfer(s)
Eventually, petitioner retired after serving employment from one sector to another or is
respondent for 17 years and 4 months upon reaching employed in both sectors, shall have his creditable
60 yrs old. However, upon approval of two services or contributions in both systems credited to
permanent employees retrenchment, petitioner now his service or contribution record in each of the
filed a complaint at NLRC for the full payment of his Systems and shall be totalized for purposes of old-
retirement benefits arguing that his service with the age, disability, survivorship, and other benefits in
DOH should have been included in the computation case the covered employee does not qualify for such
of his years of service. Hence, with an accumulated benefits in either or both Systems without
service of 32 years and should have been paid a two totalization: Provided, however, That overlapping
month pay for every year of service per the
periods of membership shall be credited only once
retirement plan.
for purposes of totalization.
ISSUE:
Obviously, totalization of service credits is only
Whether petitioners service rendered in DOH will be resorted to when the retiree does not qualify for
credited and will be added to his creditable service benefits in either or both of the Systems. Here,
later acquired in PNOC-Shipping and Transport, a petitioner is qualified to receive benefits granted by
GOCC w/o original charter. the Government Security Insurance System (GSIS),
if such right has not yet been exercised. The
HELD: pertinent provisions of law are:

We cannot uphold petitioners contention that his SEC. 12 Old Age Pension. -- (a) xxx
fourteen years of service with the DOH should be (b) A member who has rendered at least three years
considered because his last two employers were but less than fifteen years of service at the time of
government-owned and controlled corporations, and separation shall, upon reaching sixty years of age or
fall under the Civil Service Law.Article IX(B), Section upon separation after age sixty, receive a cash
2 paragraph 1 of the 1987 Constitution states -- payment equivalent to one hundred percent of his
Sec. 2. (1) The civil service embraces all branches, average monthly compensation for every year of
subdivisions, instrumentalities, and agencies of the service with an employer (Presidential Decree No,
Government, including government-owned or 1146, as amended, otherwise known as the
controlled corporations with original charters. Government Service Insurance Act of 1977).
It is not at all disputed that while Respondent and
LUSTEVECO are government-owned and controlled SEC. 4. All contributions paid by such member
corporations, they have no original charters; hence personally, and those that were paid by his
they are not under the Civil Service employers to both Systems shall be considered in the
Law. In Philippine National Oil Company-Energy processing of benefits which he can claim from either
Development Corporation v. National Labor Relations or both Systems: Provided, however, That the
Commission, we ruled: amount of benefits to be paid by one System shall
xxx Thus under the present state of the law, the test be in proportion to the number of contributions
in determining whether a government-owned or actually remitted to that System (Republic Act No.
controlled corporation is subject to the Civil Service 7699).
Law are [sic] the manner of its creation, such that
government corporations created by special In any case, petitioners fourteen years of service
charter(s) are subject to its provisions while those with the DOH may not remain uncompensated
Page | 65
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

because it may be recognized by the GSIS pursuant Food Terminal, Inc. in the category of "government-
to the aforequoted Section 12, as may be determined owned or controlled corporations." Since then, FTI
by the GSIS. Since petitioner may be entitled to served as the marketing arm of the National Grains
some benefits from the GSIS, he cannot avail of the Authority (now known as the National Food
benefits under R.A. No. 7699. Authority). The pleadings show that FTI was
previously a privately-owned enterprise, created and
LUZ LUMANTA, ET AL. vs. NLRC and FOOD organized under the general incorporation law, with
TERMINAL, INC. the corporate name "Greater Manila Food Terminal
G.R. No. 82819 February 8, 1989 Market, Inc." The record does not indicate the
precise amount of the capital stock of FM that is
FELICIANO, J.: owned by the government; the petitioners' claim,
and this has not been disputed, that FTl is not
FACTS: hundred percent (100%) government-owned and
that it has some private shareholders.
Petitioners file a complaint against FTI for unpaid
retrenchment/separation pay and underpayment of We conclude that because respondent FTI is
wages and non-payment of ECOLA with the DOLE. government-owned and controlled
FTI moved for the dismissal of the case for lack of corporation without original charter, it is the
jurisdiction contending that employees of Department of Labor and Employment, and not the
government owned and controlled corporation is not Civil Service Commission, which has jurisdiction over
governed by the Labor Code but the Civil Service Law the dispute arising from employment of the
and hence, fall within jurisdiction of the CSC and not petitioners with private respondent FTI, and that
the DOLE. consequently, the terms and conditions of such
employment are governed by the Labor Code and
Petitioners on the other hand contends that FTI has not by the Civil Service Rules and Regulations.
still a mark of a private corporation for it directly
hires its employees without seeking approval from RICARDO SUMMERS vs. ROMAN OZAETA,
CSC and that its employees are covered by SSS and Secretary of Justice, and MANUEL
not GSIS. AGREGADO, Auditor General
G.R. No. L-1534. October 25, 1948
ISSUE:
PARAS, J.:
Whether labor law claim against GOCC without
FACTS:
original charter like FTI falls within the jurisdiction of
DOLE.
Petitioner was a Cadastral Judge who qualified for
and assumed the position of Judge-at-arge of CFI
HELD:
upon receiving an ad interim appointment. However,
such appointment was later on disapproved by
Yes. The 1987 Constitution which took effect on 2
Commission on Appointment as a result thereof, the
February 1987, governs and which reads:
Secretary of Justice informed him of his separation
from service.
The civil service embraces all branches, subdivisions,
instrumentalities, and agencies of the Government,
Petitioner contend that he is entitles to continue as a
including government-owned or controlled
Cadastral Judge pursuant to Sec. 9, Art. VIII of the
corporations with original charter.
Constitution because the latter position does not
(Article IX-B, Section 2 [1])
cease upon his acceptance of the position as judge-
at-large.
The jurisdiction is determined as of the time of the
filing of the complaint. At the time the complaint
ISSUE:
against private respondent FTI was filed (i.e., 20
March 1987), and at the time the decisions of the
Whether the acceptance of a position of Judge-at-
respondent Labor Arbiter and National Labor
large amounts to a waiver of petitioners right to hold
Relations Commission were rendered (i.e., 31 August
the position as Cadastral Judge.
1987 and 18 March 1988, respectively), the 1987
Constitution had already come into effect. latter of
Instruction No. 1013, dated 19 April 1980, included
Page | 66
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

HELD: said acceptance was conditioned upon the approval


of the appointment by the Commission on
Yes. Petitioner's voluntary acceptance of the position Appointments, for, as stated in Zandueta vs. De la
of judge-at-large consequent upon his taking of the Costa, supra, the petitioner "knew, or at least he
oath of office on February 16, 1946, amounted to a should know, that his ad interim appointment was
waiver of his right to hold the position of cadastral subject to the approval of the Commission on
judge during the term fixed and guaranteed by the Appointments of the National Assembly and that if
Constitution. But it is maintained that an ad interim said commission were to disapprove the same, it
appointment is merely temporary and the petitioner would become ineffective and he would cease
cannot be said to have vacated the office of cadastral discharging the office.
judge in view of the rejection of said appointment by
the Commission on Appointments. This point has to
be resolved adversely to the petitioner, if we are to RICARDO L. MEDALLA, JR. vs.
be consistent with the decision in Zandueta vs. De la HON. PATRICIA A. STO. TOMAS, in her
Costa, supra, wherein it was held that "when a judge capacity as Chairman of the Civil Service
of first instance, presiding over a branch of a Court Commission
of First Instance of a judicial district by virtue of a G.R. No. 94255 May 5, 1992
legal and valid appointment, accepts another
appointment to preside over the same branch of the PARAS, J.:
same Court of First Instance, in addition to another
court of the same category, both of which belong to FACTS:
a new judicial district formed by the addition of
another Court of First Instance to the old one, enters
There occured a vacancy in the position of Division
into the discharge of the functions of his new office
and receives the corresponding salary, he abandons Manager in the B P and G Division of MIAA.
his old office and cannot claim to be entitled to Consequently, Engr. Singson was designated as the
repossess it or question the constitutionality of the Acting Division Manager thereof. However, in the
law by virtue of which his new appointment has been meeting conducted by MIAA Selection/Promotion
issued; and, said new appointment having been Board, Engr. Ricardo Medalla, then Supervising
disapproved by the commission on Appointments of Engineer A of the same Division was issued formal
the National Assembly, neither can he claim to appointment by then MIAA General Manager. With
continue occupying the office conferred upon him by this, Singson protest the appointment of Medalla to
said new appointment, having ipso jure ceased in the MSPB of the CSC.
discharge of the functions thereof.
Pending resolution of his protest in MSPB, MIAA
Moreover, an ad interim appointment is one made in underwent a reorganization. Pursuant to its new
pursuance of paragraph (4), section 10, Article VII, staffing pattern, MIAA reappointed Medalla and
of the Constitution, which provides that the " Singson as Division Manager D and Principal
President shall have the power to make Engineer C respectively of the New Civil Works
appointments during the recess of the Congress, but Division, which replace the B P and G Division.
such appointments shall be effective only until
disapproval by the Commission on Appointments or Notwithstanding the reorganization, MSP still
until the next adjournment of the Congress." It is an rendered its decision revoking Medallas appointment
appointment permanent in nature, and the and replace Singson in his stead having the position
circumstance that it is subject to confirmation by the next in rank to that of the vacant position.
Commission on Appointments does not alter its
permanent character. An ad interim appointment is ISSUE:
disapproved certainly for a reason other than that its
provisional period has expired. Said appointment is Whether MSPB of the CSC may revoke appointment
of course distinguishable from an "acting" made by the MIAA.
appointment which is merely temporary, good until
another permanent appointment is issued. HELD:

No. The Court has already repeatedly ruled that the


In the case at bar, the petitioner accepted and Commission has no such authority to do so. Its only
qualified for the position of judge-at-large by taking function is limited to approving or reviewing
the oath of office of judge-at-large, and not merely appointments to determine their accordance with the
of an "acting" judge-at-large. He cannot argue that requirements of the Civil Service Law. Thus, when
Page | 67
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

the Commission finds the appointee to be qualified NAB OF THE NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION
and all the other legal requirements have been (NAPOLCOM) vs. P/INSP. JOHN A.
satisfied, it has no choice but to attest to the MAMAUAG, SPO2 EUGENE ALMARIO, SPO4
appointment. Thereafter, its participation in the ERLINDA GARCIA and SPO1 VIVIAN FELIPE
appointment process. Indeed, the determination of [G.R. No. 149999. August 12, 2005]
who among several candidates for a vacant position
has the best qualifications is vested in the sound
CARPIO, J.:
discretion of the Department Head or appointing
authority and not in the Commission. This is because
FACTS:
the appointing authority occupies the ideal vantage
point from which to identify and designate the
A criminal case for child abuse was filed against
individual who can best fill the post and discharge its
Judge Angeles due to the complaint of two minors
functions in the government agency he heads.
Gaspan and Pacay recorded in the police blotter in
Consequently, when the appointing authority has
QC CPDC attended by herein respondents. On the
already exercised his power of appointment, the
otherhand, Judge Angeles filed an administrative
Commission cannot revoke the same on the ground
case against respondent police herein relative to the
that another employee is better qualified for that
criminal charge against her.
would constitute an encroachment on the decision
vested in the appointing authority. The Commission
Upon investigation of the administrative case, QC
may not and should not substitute its judgment for
CPDC dismissed the case. Judge Angeles moved for
that of the appointing authority.
the reinvestigation of the case before PNP Chief
Sarmiento where the latter ordered the dismissal of
In fine, the Court has categorically ruled:
Ganias, BIlledo and Cario; the suspension of
Mamauag and Almario for 90 days and the
We declare once again, and let us hope for the last
exoneration of Garcia and Felipe.
time, that the Civil Service Commission has no power
of appointment except over its own personnel.
Judge Angeles filed a motion for Partial
Neither does it have the authority to review the
Reconsideration of the decision. PNP Chief modified
appointments made by other offices except only to
his decision and ordered the dismissal of Mamauag,
ascertain if the appointee possesses the required
Almario, Garcia and Felipe (Mamauag et., al.).
qualifications. The determination of who among
aspirants with the minimum statutory qualifications
Mamauag et., al. petition to court for the injunction
should be preferred belongs to the appointing
of PNP Chiefs Resolution but the case was dismissed
authority and not the Civil Service Commission. It
for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
cannot disallow an appointment because it believes
Hence, they filed an appeal to NAB which however,
another person is better qualified and much less can
dismissed their petition as well as the MR for late
it direct the appointment of its own choice.
filing. Mamauag et., al. appealed to CA, where the
latter ordered to Set Aside PNP Chiefs Resolution for
Appointment is a highly discretionary act that even
excess of jurisdiction.
this Court cannot compel. While the act of
appointment may in proper cases be the subject
of mandamus, the selection itself of the appointee ISSUE:
taking into account the totality of his qualifications,
including those abstract qualities that define his 1. Whether Section 45 of Republic Act No. 6975 (RA
personality is the prerogative of the appointing 6975) allows the filing of a motion for
authority. This is a matter addressed only to the reconsideration; (This refers to the PNP Chiefs acts
discretion of the appointing authority. It is a political of modifying its previous decision where it only
question that the Civil Service Commission has no suspends and exonerate respondents)
power to review under the Constitution and the
applicable laws. 2. Whether the private complainant (Judge Angeles)
in an administrative case has the legal personality to
move for reconsideration, or appeal an adverse
decision of the disciplining authority.

HELD:

1. Section 45 of RA 6975 provides that


a disciplinary action imposed upon a member
of the PNP shall be final and executory. Under
Page | 68
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

Section 45, a disciplinary action is appealable only if The phrase party adversely affected by the decision
it involves either a demotion or dismissal from the refers to the government employee against whom
service. If the disciplinary action is less than a the administrative case is filed for the purpose of
demotion or dismissal from the service, the disciplinary action which may take the form of
disciplinary action shall be final and executory as suspension, demotion in rank or salary, transfer,
Section 45 of RA 6975 expressly mandates. Thus, a removal or dismissal from office. In the instant case,
Coloyan who filed the appeal cannot be considered
decision imposing suspension on a PNP member is
an aggrieved party because he is not the respondent
not subject to appeal to a higher authority.
in the administrative case below.
Administrative disciplinary action connotes
administrative penalty. If the decision exonerates
Finally, pursuant to Section 37 paragraph (b) of P.D.
the respondents or otherwise dismisses the charges
807, the city mayor, as head of the city government,
against the respondents, there is no disciplinary
is empowered to enforce judgment with finality on
action since no penalty is imposed. The provision lesser penalties like suspension from work for one
that a penalty less than demotion or dismissal from month and forfeiture of salary equivalent to one
service is final and executory does not apply to month against erring employees.
dismissal of charges or exoneration because they are
not disciplinary actions. By inference or implication, the remedy of
appeal may be availed of only in a case where
Before the case of CSC v. Dacoycoy. case law held the respondent is found guilty of the charges
that dismissal of the charges or exoneration of the files against him. But when the respondent is
respondents in administrative disciplinary exonerated of said charges, as in this case,
proceedings is final and not subject to appeal even there is no occasion for appeal.
by the government. Thus, in Del Castillo v. CSC, et
al., the Court held: 2. In Dacoycoy, the Court modified the rule in Del
Castillo and earlier cases by allowing the Civil
Section 37, paragraph (a), of PD 807, the Philippine Service Commission to appeal dismissals of charges
Civil Service Law, provides: or exoneration of respondents in administrative
disciplinary proceedings. In Dacoycoy, the Court
(a) The Commission shall decide upon appeal all ruled:
administrative disciplinary cases involving
the imposition of a penalty of suspension for more
At this point, we have necessarily to resolve the
than thirty days, or fine in an amount exceeding question of the party adversely affected who may
thirty days salary, demotion in rank or salary or take an appeal from an adverse decision of the
transfer, removal or dismissal from office xxx (Italics appellate court in an administrative civil service
supplied).
disciplinary case. There is no question that
respondent Dacoycoy may appeal to the Court of
Interpreting the above provision, we held in Mendez Appeals from the decision of the Civil Service
v. CSC that: Commission adverse to him. He was the respondent
official meted out the penalty of dismissal from the
It is axiomatic that the right to appeal is merely a service. On appeal to the Court of Appeals, the court
statutory privilege and may be exercised only in the required the petitioner therein, here respondent
manner and in accordance with the provision of law. Dacoycoy, to implead the Civil Service Commission
as public respondent as the government agency
tasked with the duty to enforce the constitutional
A cursory reading of P.D. 807, otherwise
and statutory provisions on the civil service.
known as The Philippine Civil Service Law
shows that said law does not contemplate a
review of decisions exonerating officers or Subsequently, the Court of Appeals reversed the
employees from administrative charges. decision of the Civil Service Commission and held
respondent not guilty of nepotism. Who now may
appeal the decision of the Court of Appeals to
Section 37 paragraph (a) thereof, provides:
the Supreme Court? Certainly not the
respondent, who was declared not guilty of
Said provision must be read together with Section 39 the charge. Nor the complainant George P.
paragraph (a) of P.D. 805 which contemplates: Suan, who was merely a witness for the
government. Consequently, the Civil Service
Appeals, where allowable, shall be made by the party Commission has become the party adversely
adversely affected by the decision. affected by such ruling, which seriously
Page | 69
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

prejudices the civil service system. Hence, as LUZVIMINDA DE LA CRUZ, Et. Al. vs.
an aggrieved party, it may appeal the decision COURT OF APPEALS, CSC and THE
of the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court. SECRETARY OF THE DECS
By this ruling, we now expressly abandon and G.R. No. 126183 March 25, 1999
overrule extant jurisprudence that the phrase party
adversely affected by the decision refers to the BELLOSILLO, J.:
government employee against whom the
administrative case is filed for the purpose of
FACTS:
disciplinary action which may take the form of
suspension, demotion in rank or salary, transfer,
removal or dismissal from office and not included are Petitioners are public school teachers who were
cases where the penalty imposed is suspension for simultaneously charged, preventively suspended,
not more than thirty (30) days or fine in an amount and eventually dismissed by Sec. Carino in Oct. 1990.
not exceeding thirty days salary or when the It was alleged that the teachers participated in the
respondent is exonerated of the charges, there is no mass action/ illegal strike on Sept. 1990. The
occasion for appeal. In other words, we overrule teachers also violated the return-to-work order
prior decisions holding that the Civil Service issued by the DECS. Respondents failed to explain to
Law does not contemplate a review of the DECS despite the 5-day period given. Hence,
decisions exonerating officers or employees they were found guilty as charged, and subsequently
from administrative charges.
dismissed from office by Sec. Carino of the
DECS. The Civil Service Commission, upon appeal,
Subsequent decisions of the Court found the teachers guilty of conduct prejudicial to
affirmed Dacoycoy. the best interest of service, and imposed upon them
Dacoycoy allowed the Civil Service Commission to the reduced penalty of six months suspension.
appeal dismissals of charges or exoneration of However, in view of the length of time that the
respondents in administrative disciplinary teachers had been out of service due to the dismissal
proceedings. issued by Sec. Carino, the CSC likewise ordered their
immediate reinstatement without back wages.
However, Dacoycoy maintained the rule that the
private complainant is a mere government witness
without a right to appeal. Thus, case law holding that ISSUE:
the private complainant has no right to appeal the
decision of the disciplining authority remains good 1. Whether the teachers conducts are prejudicial to
law. As explained by Justice Jose Melo in his the best interest of service.
concurring opinion in Floralde v. Court of
Appeals: 2. Whether or not the teachers are entitled to back
wages for the period of 3 years pending their appeal
However, in Civil Service Commission v. deducting the 6 months suspension eventually
Dacoycoy which incidentally is another ponencia of meted out to them.
Mr. Justice Pardo, the majority, with
undersigned ponente dissenting, modified the above HELD:
doctrine by allowing the CSC to appeal in cases
where the respondent is exonerated of the 1. YES, the mass actions amounted to a prohibited
charges. Nevertheless, in both cases, the Court strike of civil service servants. Although the right to
did not deviate from the doctrine that the
peaceably assemble and petition the government for
complainant, being a mere witness for the
redress of grievances is guaranteed by
government, cannot appeal the decision
the Constitution, this liberty must be exercised
rendered in the administrative case.
In Paredes, we declared that the complainant is not within reasonable limits. The public-school teachers
the party adversely affected by the decision so that committed acts prejudicial to the interest of the
she has no legal personality to interpose an appeal service by staging the mass protests on regular
to the CSC. In an administrative case, the school days, abandoning their classes and failing to
complainant is a mere witness. No private interest is return despite the return to work order.
involved in an administrative case as the offense is
committed against the government. 2. NO, they are not entitled to back wages. The
teachers were neither exonerated nor unjustifiably
suspended, the 2 circumstances necessary for the
grant of back wages in
administrative disciplinary cases.
Page | 70
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

IN RE FIRST INDORSEMET FROM ISSUE:


HONORABLE RAUL M. GONZALEZ
REQUESTING HONORABLE JUSTICE Whether or not a Supreme Court justice can be
MARCELO B. FERNAN TO COMMENT ON AN disbarred during his term of office.
ANONYMOUS LETTER-COMPLAINT.
A.M. No. 88-4-5433 April 15, 1988 HELD:

RESOLUTION A public officer (such as Justice Fernan) who under


the Constitution is required to be a Member of the
PER CURIAM: Philippine Bar as a qualification for the office held by
him and who may be removed from office only by
FACTS: impeachment, cannot be charged with disbarment
during the incumbency of such public officer.
The Court CONSIDERED the 1st Indorsement dated Further, such public officer, during his incumbency,
16 March 1988 from Mr. Raul M. Gonzalez, cannot be charged criminally before the
"Tanodbayan/Special; Prosecutor" forwarding to Mr. Sandiganbayan, or any other court, with any offense
Justice Marcelo B. Fernan a "letter-complaint, dated which carries with it the penalty of removal from
14 December 1987 with enclosure of the Concerned office.
Employees of the Supreme Court," together with a
telegram of Miguel Cuenco, for "comment within ten Another reason why the complaint for disbarment
(10) days from receipt hereof." Mr. Justice Fernan should be dismissed is because under the
had brought this 1st Indorsement to the attention of Constitution, members of the SC may be removed
the Court en banc in view of the important only by impeachment. The above provision
implications of policy raised by said 1st Indorsement. proscribes removal from office by any other method.
Otherwise, to allow such public officer who may be
Gonzales was the Tanodbayan or Special Prosecutor. removed solely by impeachment to be charged
He forwarded to Mr. Justice Marcelo B. Fernan a criminally while holding his office with an office that
letter-complaint. The letter was said to be from carries the penalty of removal from office, would be
concerned employees of the SC (an anonymous violative of the clear mandate of the Constitution.
letter).
The effect of impeachment is limited to the loss of
The letter was originally addressed to Gonzales position and disqualification to hold any office of
referring to the charges for disbarment sought by Mr. honor, trust or profit under the Republic. Judgment
Miguel Cuenco against Justice Fernan, and asking in cases of impeachment shall not extend further
him (Gonzales) to do something about it. than removal from office and disqualification to hold
The Court furnished to Mr. Raul M. Gonzales a copy any office. But the party convicted shall nevertheless
of the per curiam Resolution in which, the Court be held liable and subject to prosecution, trial and
Resolved to dismiss the charges made by complaint punishment according to law.
Cuenco against Mr.Justice Fernan for utter lack of
merit. In the same Resolution, the Court Resolved to The court is not saying that its Members or other
require complainant Cuenco to show cause why he constitutional officers are entitled to immunity from
should not be administratively dealt with for making liability for possibly criminal acts or for alleged
unfounded serious accusations against Mr. Justice violation of the Canons of Judicial Ethics or other
Fernan. Upon request of Mr. Cueco, the Court had supposed misbehavior. What the court is saying is
granted him an extension of up to 30 March 1988, that there is a fundamental procedural requirement
Mr. Cuenco filed a pleading which appears to be an that must be observed before such liability may be
omnibus pleading relating to, inter alia, determined and enforced. A member of the Supreme
Administrative Case No. 3135. Insofar as Court must first be removed from office, via the
Administrative Case No. 3135 is concerned, the Court constitutional route of impeachment, and then only
treated this pleading as a Motion for may he be held liable either criminally or
Reconsideration. By a per curiam Resolution dated administratively (that is, disbarment), for any wrong
15 April 1988, the Court denied with finality Mr or misbehavior that may be proven against him in
Cuenco's Motion for Reconsideration. appropriate proceedings.

Page | 71
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN public officials and employees and ensure


vs. compliance therewith.
GERTRUDES MADRIAGA and ANA MARIE
BERNARDO The Court notes that the proviso above qualifies the
G.R. No. 164316. September 27, 2006 "order" "to remove, suspend, demote, fine, censure,
or prosecute" an officer or employee akin to the
CARPIO MORALES, J.: questioned issuances in the case at bar. That the
refusal, without just cause, of any officer to comply
The Ombudsmans authority to impose with such an order of the Ombudsman to penalize an
administrative penalty and enforce erring officer or employee is a ground for disciplinary
compliance therewith is not merely action, is a strong indication that the Ombudsman's
recommendatory but mandatory within the "recommendation" is not merely advisory in nature
bounds of the law. but is actually mandatory within the bounds of law.
This should not be interpreted as usurpation by the
FACTS: Ombudsman of the authority of the head of office or
any officer concerned. It has long been settled that
The San Juan School Club filed a letter-complaint the power of the Ombudsman to investigate and
filed before the Office of the Ombudsman charging prosecute any illegal act or omission of any public
Gertrudes Madriaga, school principal of San Juan official is not an exclusive authority but a shared or
Elementary School and Ana Marie Bernardo, Canteen concurrent authority in respect of the offense
Manager of the same school, with violation of Section charged. By stating therefore that the Ombudsman
1 of Rule IV and Section 1 of Rule VI of the Rules "recommends" the action to be taken against an
Implementing Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6713 erring officer or employee, the provisions in the
otherwise known as the Code of Conduct and Ethical Constitution and in R.A. 6770 intended that the
Standards for Public Officials and Employees. They implementation of the order be coursed through the
were subsequently found guilty of the offense proper officer, which in this case would be the head
charged. Consequently, they were meted out the of the BID.
penalty of six (6) months suspension.
The word "recommend" in Sec. 15(3) must thus be
On appeal, the Court of Appeals declared that the read in conjunction with the phrases "ensure
six-month suspension meted out by the Office of the compliance therewith" or "enforce its disciplinary
Ombudsman to Madriaga and Bernardo (Gertrudes) authority as provided in Section 21" of R.A. No. 6770.
is merely recommendatory to the Department of In fine, the Ombudsman's authority to impose
Education, the Office of the Ombudsman filed the administrative penalty and enforce compliance
present Petition for Review on Certiorari. therewith is not merely recommendatory. It is
mandatory within the bounds of the law. The
ISSUE: implementation of the order imposing the penalty is,
however, to be coursed through the proper officer.
Whether or not the Office of the Ombudsman has
the authority to impose administrative sanctions over U.P. BOARD OF REGENTS, DR. JOSE V.
public officials ABUEVA vs. HON. JAINAL D. RASUL, in his
capacity as Presiding Judge, Branch 69 of the
HELD: Regional Trial Court, Pasig, Metro Manila, and
DR. FELIPE A. ESTRELLA, JR.,
Article XI, Section 13 of the 1987 Constitution grants G.R. No. 91551. August 16, 1991
the Ombudsman administrative disciplinary power to
direct the officer concerned to take appropriate GANCAYCO, J.:
action against a public official or employee at fault,
and recommend his removal, suspension, demotion, FACTS:
fine, censure, or prosecution, and ensure compliance
therewith. Dr. Felipe Estrada Jr. was the Director of PGH
appointed by the UP Board of Regents which
Section 15(3) of R.A. No. 6770 echoes the intended to have him serve his full term as a Director.
constitutional grant to the Ombudsman of the power
to recommend the imposition of penalty on erring President Abueva, the new president of UP, upon
assuming position submitted a memorandum to BOR
Page | 72
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

to reorganize UP Manila including PGH and the position of PGH Director. This is because where
recommended that certain key positions of UP the abolished office and the offices created in its
Manila, including that of the plaintiff be declared place have similar functions, the abolition lacks good
vacant. faith.We hereby apply the principle enunciated
in Cesar Z. Dalio vs. Hon. Salvador M. Mison that
ISSUES: abolition which merely changes the nomenclature of
positions is invalid and does not result in the removal
of the incumbent.
1. Whether Dr. Estrella's security of tenure was
violated due to reorganization. YES 2. The UP Board of Regents acted within the scope
and limitations of its charter, Act No. 1870, as
2. Whether UP has authority to abolish office. NO amended when it approved the reorganization plan
renaming the PGH and expanding and consolidating
HELD: some of its functions and objectives. The UP Board
of Regents did not and could not have abolished
1. The whole reorganization set-up under our law PGH. And rightly so. The PGH and one of its
cannot or should not have the effect of abolishing component units, the Cancer Institute, are creations
the position of the plaintiff unless legal requirements of special laws, the old Administrative, Code
are complied with. If the reorganization plan results (Chapter 29, Secs. 706-707) and Commonwealth Act
No. 398, respectively. The authority of the UP under
in abolishing the position of the plaintiff and in
Act No. 1870 as amended, to combine two or more
putting in his place another one, with substantially
colleges in the interest of economy and efficiency
the same duties, not to say qualifications, in the
does not empower UP to abolish offices created by
name of leadership, it will surely be considered a special laws.
device to unseat the incumbent and to circumvent
the constitutional and statutory prohibition of
removal from office of a civil service officer even It is therefore clear that the authority of the UP is
without cause provided by law. Plaintiffs position limited to what is expressly provided in Act No. 1870
should not therefore be deemed abolished by mere as amended, that is, to combine or merge colleges.
implication If the abolition of office is made to That is all the law speaks of in such instance.
circumvent the constitutional security of tenure of
civil service employees, our Supreme Court, has On the other hand, the power to create and abolish
ruled that such abolition is null and void. offices carries with it the power to fix the number of
positions, salaries, emoluments, and to provide
funds for the operation of the office created. This
power is inherently legislative in character. The UP
Respondent Dr. Estrella was appointed Director of
Board of Regents does not have such power. Hence,
PGH on 1986 by the LTP Board of Regents. His
the abolition of the position of respondent Dr.
appointment was to be effective September 1, 1986
Estrella is not valid.
until April 30, 1992 or unless sooner terminated.
Appointees of the LTP Board of Regents enjoy
security of tenure during their term of office.
Petitioners argue, however, that the abolition of the WENONAH L. MARQUEZ AZARCON
position of respondent Dr. Estrella Jr. negates his vs. HOUSING AND LAND USE ARBITER
claim to security of tenure. The argument is devoid CHARITO BUNAGAN, BOARD OF
of merit. COMMISSIONERS (SPECIAL DIVISION),
EQUITY HOMES, INC., SAGANA
It is clear from the record that the PGH itself was not CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT CORP.
abolished in the reorganization plan approved by the and J. M. BUILDERS, INC.,
UP Board of Regents. The PGH was merely renamed [G. R. No. 124611. March 20, 2003]
"UP-PGH Medical Center" and some of it functions
and objectives were expanded or consolidated. CARPIO-MORALES, J.:
There is no substantial distinction, in terms of
functions, between PGH and the proposed UP-PGH
FACTS:
Medical Center.

It is true that a valid and bona fide abolition of an SAGANA and JIM Builders entered into a contract to
office denies to the incumbent the right to security sell the house and lot with Wenonah Azarcon located
of tenure. However, in this case, the renaming and in QC the balance to be paid through SSS loan. The
restructuring of the PGH and its component units loan was disapproved partly for failure of SAGANA to
cannot give rise to a valid and bona fide abolition of submit certain requirements. She offered cash but
Page | 73
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

the latter refused. She then occupied the property. We are convinced that [Azarcon] should not be held
Housing and Land Use Arbitrator modified the responsible for the delay in the release of the loan a
previous decision and require Azarcon to pay the nd consequently for the non-
balance of 3k rental per month said amount of rental payment of the purchase price.
shall form part of the purchase price of the premises. Such being the case, we believe that a recall of our
SAGANA received the payment but refused to previous ruling ordering [Azarcon] to pay interest by
execute Deed of Sale on the ground that Azarcon had way of damages is in order.
yet to pay rentals. SAGANA filed to HLA to compel
AZARCON to pay rentals. The Board issued Writ of If Azarcon had been spared by the Board of paying
Execution in accordance with its previous modified interest by way of damages because she was not
order. Azarcon petition to CA that the order is responsible for the delay in the release of the loan
different, it varies from the previous order. and consequently for the non-payment of [the
balance] of the purchase price, why should the Board
ISSUE: Whether HLA decisions vary thus CA erred have intended to make her liable to pay rentals over
in affirming HLA decision. and above the balance of the purchase
price, especially given her tender of payment of suc
HELD: Writ of Execution in question varied to the h
terms of HLURB previous decision. balance after the loan applicationwas not approved,
which tender SAGANA refused to accept without
The dispute thus arises from the parties conflicting interest being paid thereon? That the Board had no
understanding or interpretation of the phrase the such intention, the following portion of its May 10,
said amount of rental shall form part of the purchase 1993 decision instructs:
price as adjusted found in the fallo, Azarcon
contending that the payment of rentals is an In the absence of payment through housing loan, the
alternative to the payment of the balance of the buyershould effect payment through other means w
purchase price, and SAGANA contending that the ithin a reasonable period. The seller should also
rental payments shall be in addition to the balance extend all support and assistance to make it possible
of the purchase price. for the buyer to find such means, particularly if it
contributed to the non-release of the loan. If parties
Of the partys interpretations, SAGANAs is contrary cannot agree on the substitute method of payment
to their agreement. They agreed upon the purchase on the period for effecting the same, then the Board
price of the subject property in 1995 when they may step to fix the same. Meantime we believe
entered into the contract to sell. The amount agreed that until this matter can be resolved, complainant s
upon became the law between them. hould pay rentals as equitable payment for use of t
he premises, which can be applied to the balance of
To follow the interpretation proffered by SAGANA the purchase price.
would allow the Board to alter the parties agreement
on the purchase price. From the immediately foregoing disquisition of the
Board, it is clear that the payment of rentals was
Upon the other hand, Azarcons interpretation is more devised by it merely as an interim scheme, until a
in accord with the finding of the Board that substitute method of payment [of the balance of the
the delay in the payment of the purchase price was purchase price] was agreed upon by the parties.
not due to her fault, precisely on account of which
finding it deleted the order for the payment of Since Azarcon fully paid the balance of the purchase
interest by Azarcon. Held the Board: price on July 22, 1993, less than three months after
the Board decision was promulgated on May 10,
[SAGANA] has failed to convincingly refute 1993, that part of the decision respecting payment
[AZARCONs] argument that the non-release of the through other means devised by the Board for
loan was due to its non-submission of certain Azarcon to, in the meantime, pay rentals as equitable
requirements. payment for the use of the premises, which can be
applied to the balance of the purchase price, had
Hence, for this reason, the issue [of whether or not become functus oficio. To hold otherwise would be
Azarcon is liable for the payment of interest] is to fault Azarcon in whom none was, as reflected
resolved in the negative. above, found by the Board. It would also gloss over
Azarcons initial payment of a substantial amount
when they entered into the contract to sell and her
Page | 74
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

tender of payment of the balance which was, The ruling in Dinsay is not applicable to the case at
however, rejected by SAGANA. It would thus ignore bar. First, it is a decision of the Court of Appeals;
the interest of justice and equity which underlies all hence, it does not establish a doctrine and can only
systems of justice. have a persuasive value.
The OMBUDSMAN takes a different view. For one, he
PRESIDENTIAL AD HOC FACT-FINDING asserts that Section 15 of Article XI of the
COMMITTEE ON BEHEST LOANS vs. HON. Constitution is not applicable, since what the
ANIANO A. DESIERTO as Ombudsman COMMITTEE seeks is not to recover the unlawfully
G.R. No. 130140 October 25, 1999 acquired wealth from the respondents therein but to
hold them criminally liable for violation of R.A. No.
DAVIDE, JR., C.J.: 3019.

FACTS: According to him, the computation of the prescriptive


period from the date of discovery would only be
President Fidel V. Ramos issued Administrative Order resorted to if the commission of the crime be not
No. 13, creating the Presidential Ad Hoc Fact-Finding known at the day of the commission. The phrase "if
Committee on Behest Loans, the same be not known" does not mean "lack of
actual knowledge
In its FOURTEENTH (14TH) REPORT ON BEHEST
LOANS to President Ramos, dated 15 July 1993, the ISSUE:
COMMITTEE reported that the Philippine, Seeds,
Inc., (hereafter PSI) of which the respondents in Whether the OMBUDSMAN gravely abused its
OMB-0-96-0968 were the Directors, was one of the discretion in holding that offenses had already
twenty-one corporations which obtained behest prescribed
loans.
HELD:
President Ramos directed COMMITTEE Chairman
Magtanggol C. Gunigundo to, inter alia, "proceed We agree with the OMBUDSMAN that Section 15 of
with administrative and judicial actions against the Article XI of the Constitution applies only to civil
twenty-one firms. The COMMITTEE filed with the actions for recovery of ill-gotten wealth, and not to
OMBUDSMAN a sworn complaint against the criminal cases. It is just the imprescriptibily of the
Directors of PSI and the BDM who approved the civil action, it does not cover imprescriptibility of
loans for violation of RA No. 3019. criminal action.The prescription shall begin to run
again if the proceedings are dismissed for reasons
In the resolution OMBUDSMAN dismissed the not constituting double jeopardy.
complaint on the ground of prescription. Relying
on People v. Dinsay, a case decided by the Court of In the present case, it was well-nigh impossible for
Appeals, he ratiocinated that since the questioned the State, to have known the violations of R.A. No.
transactions were evidenced by public instruments 3019 at the time the questioned transactions were
and were thus open for the perusal of the public, the made because, as alleged, the public officials
prescriptive period commenced to run from the time concerned connived or conspired with the
of the commission of the crime, not from the "beneficiaries of the loans." Thus, the prescriptive
discovery thereof. period for that should be computed from the
discovery of the commission thereof and not from
The COMMITTEE argues that the right of the the day of such commission.
Republic of the Philippines to recover behest loans as
ill-gotten wealth is imprescriptible pursuant to the OMBUDSMAN forthwith dismissed the complaint
mandate of Section 15 of Article XI of the without even requiring the respondents to submit
Constitution, which provides: their counter-affidavits and solely on the basis of the
dates the alleged behest loans were granted. It
The right of the State to recover properties should have first received from the complainant and
unlawfully acquired by public officials or employees, the respondents to resolve the case on merits and
from them or from their nominees as transferees, on the issue of the date of discovery of the offense.
shall not be barred by prescription, laches, or Ombudsman is directed to proceed with the
estoppel. preliminary investigation.

Page | 75
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

provisions of Republic Act No. 3019 or of the


ADDITIONAL CASES FOR FINALS provisions of Title 7, Book II of the Revised Penal
Code, or (3) the informations against him can be
quashed, under any of the grounds provided in
PERLA A. SEGOVIA, REYNALDO C. SANTIAGO, Section 2, Rule 117 of the Rules of Court. (People vs.
and WINIFREDO SM. PANGILINAN vs. Albano, etc., et al. supra, fn. 26)
SANDIGANBAYAN, PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, and the PRESIDENT of the NPC Once the information is found to be sufficient in form
G.R. No. 124067 March 27, 1998 and substance, then the court must issue the order
of suspension as a matter of course. There are no ifs
NARVASA, C.J.: and buts about it. This is because a preventive
suspension is not a penalty. It is not imposed as a
FACTS: result of judicial proceedings. In fact, if acquitted,
the official concerned shall be entitled to
Petitioner, who are the officers composing the reinstatement and to the salaries and benefits which
Contracts Committee of the NPC was accused to he failed to receive during suspension. In view of this
have violated RA 3019 for having extended undue latter provision, the accused elective public officer
does not stand to be prejudiced by the immediate
advantage to Joint Venture (one of the bidders in its
enforcement of the suspension order in the event
project).
that the information is subsequently declared null
and void on appeal and the case dismissed as against
The complaint against petitioner was filed in the him. Taking into consideration the public policy
Ombudsman where the latter conducted preliminary involved in preventively suspending a public officer
investigation and release its resolution charging charged under a valid information, the protection of
petitioners the violation of Sec. 3 (e) of RA 3019. public interest will definitely have to prevail over the
private interest of the accused.
Consequently, an information was filed with the
Sandiganbayan against petitioners. On the To further emphasize the ministerial duty of the court
otherhand, the People filed a motion to suspend under Section 13 of Republic Act No.3019, it is said
accused pendent lite invoking Sec. 13 of RA 3019, as that the court trying the case has neither discretion
amended and alleged that the information is valid. nor duty to determine whether or not a preventive
The court resolved in favor of the People and suspension is required to prevent the accused from
suspend the petitioners for a period of 90 days. using his office to intimidate witnesses or frustrate
Petitioners questioned the said suspension, his prosecution or continue committing malfeasance
in office. The presumption is that unless the accused
contending that suspension by Sandiganbayan by SB
is suspended, he may frustrate his prosecution or
under RA 3019 is not mandatory.
commit further acts of malfeasance or do both, in the
same way that upon a finding that there is probable
ISSUE: cause to believe that a crime has been committed
and that the accused is probably guilty thereof, the
Whether the preventive suspension under Sec. 13, law requires the judge to issue a warrant for the
RA 3019 is mandatory. arrest of the accused. The law does not require the
court to determine whether the accused is likely to
HELD: escape or evade the jurisdiction of the court.

Yes. Upon a proper determination of the validity of MIRIAM DEFENSOR SANTIAGO


the information, it becomes mandatory for the court vs. SANDIGANBAYAN
to immediately issue the suspension order. The rule [G.R. No. 128055. April 18, 2001]
on the matter is specific and categorical. It leaves no
room for interpretation. It is not within the court's VITUG, J.:
discretion to hold in abeyance the suspension of the
accused officer on the pretext that the order denying FACTS:
the motion to quash is pending review before the
appellate courts. Its discretion lies only during the A group of employees from CID filed complaint to the
pre-suspension hearing where it is required to Ombudsman against then CID Commissioner
ascertain whether or not (1) the accused had been
Santiago, a Senator of the Philippines at the time this
afforded due preliminary investigation prior to the
complaint was filed, for alleged violation of RA 3019
filing of the information against him, (2) the acts for
which he was charged constitute a violation of the by approving the application for legalization of the
stay of some disqualified aliens.
Page | 76
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

during suspension. (At p. 386) In issuing the


As a result thereof, an information was filed by preventive suspension of petitioner, the
Ombudsman with the Sandiganbayan where the Sandiganbayan merely adhered to the clear and
latter orders preventive suspension of Santiago from unequivocal mandate of the law, as well as the
her position as Senator and from any other jurisprudence in which the Court has, more than
government position she may be holding at present once, upheld Sandiganbayans authority to decree
or hereafter for 90 days effective immediately. the suspension of public officials and employees
indicted before it. Section 13 of Republic Act No.
ISSUE: 3019 does not state that the public officer concerned
must be suspended only in the office where he is
Whether Sandiganbayan has authority to decree 90 alleged to have committed the acts with which he
days preventive suspension from any other has been charged. Thus, it has been held that the
government position. use of the word office would indicate that it applies
to any office which the officer charged may be
HELD: holding, and not only the particular office under
which he stands accused. (Bayot v. Sandiganbayan,
Yes. The petition assails the authority of the supra; Segovia v. Sandiganbayan, supra.)
Sandiganbayan to decree a ninety-day preventive
suspension of Mme. Miriam Defensor-Santiago, a En passant, while the imposition of suspension is not
Senator of the Republic of the Philippines, from any automatic or self-operative as the validity of the
government position, and furnishing a copy thereof information must be determined in a pre-suspension
to the Senate of the Philippines for the hearing, there is no hard and fast rule as to the
implementation of the suspension order. The conduct thereof. It has been said that
authority of the Sandiganbayan to order the xxx
preventive suspension of an incumbent public official No specific rules need be laid down for such
charged with violation of the provisions of Republic presuspension hearing. Suffice it to state that the
Act No. 3019 has both legal and jurisprudential accused should be given a fair and adequate
support. opportunity to challenge the VALIDITY OF THE
Xxx CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS against him, e.g., that he
In the relatively recent case of Segovia v. has not been afforded the right of due preliminary
Sandiganbayan (288 SCRA 328 [1998]), the Court investigation; that the acts for which he stands
reiterated: The validity of Section 13, R.A. 3019, as charged do not constitute a violation of the
amended treating of the suspension pendente lite provisions of Republic Act 3019 or the bribery
of an accused public officer may no longer be put provisions of the Revised Penal Code which would
at issue, having been repeatedly upheld by this warrant his mandatory suspension from office under
Court. X x x The provision of suspension pendente Section 13 of the Act; or he may present a motion to
lite applies to all persons indicted upon a valid quash the information on any of the grounds
information under the Act, whether they be provided for in Rule 117 of the Rules of Court
appointive or elective officials; or permanent or x x x. x x x
temporary employees, or pertaining to the career or Likewise, he is accorded the right to challenge the
non-career service. (At pp. 336-337) It would propriety of his prosecution on the ground that the
appear, indeed, to be a ministerial duty of the court acts for which he is charged do not constitute a
to issue an order of suspension upon determination violation of Rep. Act 3019, or of the provisions on
of the validity of the information filed before it. Once bribery of the Revised Penal Code, and the right to
the information is found to be sufficient in form and present a motion to quash the information on any
substance, the court is bound to issue an order of other grounds provided in Rule 117 of the Rules of
suspension as a matter of course, and there seems Court. However, a challenge to the validity of the
to be no ifs and buts about it. criminal proceedings on the ground that the acts for
which the accused is charged do not constitute a
Explaining the nature of the preventive suspension, violation of the provisions of Rep. Act No. 3019, or
the Court in the case of Bayot v. Sandiganbayan (128 of the provisions on bribery of the Revised Penal
SCRA 383 [1984]) observed: x x x It is not a penalty Code, should be treated only in the same manner as
because it is not imposed as a result of judicial a challenge to the criminal proceeding by way of a
proceedings. In fact, if acquitted, the official motion to quash on the ground provided in
concerned shall be entitled to reinstatement and to Paragraph (a), Section 2 of Rule 117 of the Rules of
the salaries and benefits which he failed to receive Court, i.e., that the facts charged do not constitute
Page | 77
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

an offense. In other words, a resolution of the despite his protestations on the encroachment by the
challenge to the validity of the criminal proceeding, court on the prerogatives of Congress. The Court
on such ground, should be limited to an inquiry ruled: x x x. Petitioners invocation of Section 16 (3),
whether the facts alleged in the information, if Article VI of the Constitution which deals with the
hypothetically admitted, constitute the elements of power of each House of Congress inter alia to punish
an offense punishable under Rep. Act 3019 or the its Members for disorderly behavior, and suspend or
provisions on bribery of the Revised Penal Code. expel a Member by a vote of two-thirds of all its
Members subject to the qualification that the penalty
The law does not require that the guilt of the accused of suspension, when imposed, should not exceed
must be established in a pre-suspension proceeding sixty days in unavailing, as it appears to be quite
before trial on the merits proceeds. Neither does it distinct from the suspension spoken of in Section 13
contemplate a proceeding to determine (1) the of RA 3019, which is not a penalty but a preliminary,
strength of the evidence of culpability against him, preventive measure, prescinding from the fact that
(2) the gravity of the offense charged, or (3) whether the latter is not being imposed on petitioner for
or not his continuance in office could influence the misbehavior as a Member of the House of
witnesses or pose a threat to the safety and integrity Representatives. The doctrine of separation of
of the records and other evidence before the court powers by itself may not be deemed to have
could have a valid basis in decreeing preventive effectively excluded Members of Congress from
suspension pending the trial of the case. All it Republic Act No. 3019 nor from its sanctions. The
secures to the accused is adequate opportunity to maxim simply recognizes each of the three co-equal
challenge the validity or regularity of the proceedings and independent, albeit coordinate, branches of the
against him, such as, that he has not been afforded government the Legislative, the Executive and the
the right to due preliminary investigation, that the Judiciary has exclusive prerogatives and
acts imputed to him do not constitute a specific crime cognizance within its own sphere of influence and
warranting his mandatory suspension from office effectively prevents one branch from unduly
under Section 13 of Republic Act No. 3019, or that intruding into the internal affairs of either branch.
the information is subject to quashal on any of the Parenthetically, it might be well to elaborate a bit.
grounds set out in Section 3, Rule 117, of the Revised Section 1, Article VIII, of the 1987 Constitution,
Rules on Criminal Procedure (Segovia v. empowers the Court to act not only in the settlement
Sandiganbayan, supra; Resolution of the Supreme of actual controversies involving rights which are
Court in A.M. No. 00-05-03-SC, dated 03 October legally demandable and enforceable, but also in the
2000, which became effective on 01 December determination of whether or not there has been a
2000) grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
Xxx excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
The pronouncement, upholding the validity of the instrumentality of the government. The provision
information filed against petitioner, behooved allowing the Court to look into any possible grave
Sandiganbayan to discharge its mandated duty to abuse of discretion committed by any government
forthwith issue the order of preventive suspension. instrumentality has evidently been couched in
The order of suspension prescribed by Republic Act general terms in order to make it malleable to judicial
No. 3019 is distinct from the power of Congress to interpretation in the light of any emerging milieu. In
discipline its own ranks under the Constitution which its normal concept, the term has been said to imply
provides that each x x x house may determine the an arbitrary, despotic, capricious or whimsical
rules of its proceedings, punish its Members for exercise of judgment amounting to lack or excess of
disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of jurisdiction. When the question, however, pertains to
two-thirds of all its Members, suspend or expel a an affair internal to either of Congress or the
Member. A penalty of suspension, when imposed, Executive, the Court subscribes to the view that
shall not exceed sixty days. (Section 16[3], Article unless an infringement of any specific Constitutional
VI, 1987 Constitution) The suspension contemplated proscription thereby inheres the Court should not
in the above constitutional provision is a punitive deign substitute its own judgment over that of any
measure that is imposed upon determination by the of the other two branches of government. It is an
Senate or the House of Representatives, as the case impairment or a clear disregard of a specific
may be, upon an erring member. Thus, in its constitutional precept or provision that can unbolt
resolution in the case of Ceferino Paredes, Jr. v. the steel door for judicial intervention. If any part of
Sandiganbayan, et al. (G.R. No. 118364, 08 August the Constitution is not, or ceases to be, responsive
1995), the Court affirmed the order of suspension of to contemporary needs, it is the people, not the
Congressman Paredes by the Sandiganbayan, Court, who must promptly react in the manner
Page | 78
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

prescribed by the Charter itself. Republic Act No. The concept of holdover when applied to a public
3019 does not exclude from its coverage the officer implies that the office has a fixed term and
members of Congress and that, therefore, the the incumbent is holding onto the succeeding
Sandiganbayan did not err in thus decreeing the term. It is usually provided by law that officers
assailed preventive suspension order. Attention elected or appointed for a fixed term shall remain in
might be called to the fact that Criminal Case No. office not only for that term but until their successors
have been elected and qualified. Where this
16698 has been decided by the First Division of the
provision is found, the office does not become vacant
Sandiganbayan on 06 December 1999, acquitting
upon the expiration of the term if there is no
herein petitioner. The Court, nevertheless, deems it successor elected and qualified to assume it, but the
appropriate to render this decision for future present incumbent will carry over until his successor
guidance on the significant issue raised by petitioner. is elected and qualified, even though it be beyond
(Sandoval Notes) the term fixed by law.

In the instant case, although BP Blg. 51 does not say


HOLD OVER DOCTRINE: CONCEPT AND that a Sanggunian member can continue to occupy
PURPOSE his post after the expiration of his term in case his
successor fails to qualify, it does, not also say that
FRANCISCO M. LECAROZ and LENLIE he is proscribed from holding over. Absent an
express or implied constitutional or statutory
LECAROZ vs. SANDIGANBAYAN and PEOPLE
provision to the contrary, an officer is entitled to stay
OF THE PHILIPPINES
in office until his successor is appointed or chosen
G.R. No. 130872 March 25, 1999
and has qualified. The legislative intent of not
allowing holdover must be clearly expressed or at
BELLOSILLO, J.: least implied in the legislative enactment, otherwise
it is reasonable to assume that the law-making body
FACTS: favors the same.

In the 1985 election, Jowl Red on as KB Indeed, the law abhors a vacuum in public
Chairman of Brgy. Matalaba Sta. Cruz where offices, and courts generally indulge in the strong
petitioners Francisco Lecaroz was the presumption against a legislative intent to create, by
municipal mayor and his son Lenlie Lecaroz statute, a condition which may result in an executive
was the outgoing Chairman of KB of Sta. Cruz or administrative office becoming, for any period of
and concurrently a member of its time, wholly vacant or unoccupied by one lawfully
Sangguniang Bayan (SB) representing authorized to exercise its functions. This is founded
Federation of Kabataang Barangays. on obvious considerations of public policy, for the
principle of holdover is specifically intended to
Red filed a complaint to Ombudsman alleging prevent public convenience from suffering because
that despite appointment as member of the SB of a vacancy and to avoid a hiatus in the
by then President Marcos, the confirmation performance of government functions.
letter from Imee Marcos, then National
Chairperson of the Organization, and his prior RAUL A. GALAROSA vs. HON. EUDARLIO B.
oath takng, Mayor Lecaroz still not allowed VALENCIA
him to sit as sectoral representative in the SB. G.R. No. 109455 November 11, 1993
He further alleged that petitioners falsified the
payroll to appear that Lenlie was reinstated in DAVIDE, JR., J.:
the position in the SB and still received its
salary despite the expiration of his tenure in FACTS:
office.
Raul Galarosa is a president of the Katipunang Bayan
ISSUE: of the municipality of Sorsogon. Like the LGC of
1991, the(old) LGC of 1983 or BP 337 grants
Whether the outgoing public officer may hold Galarosa the right to serve as ex-officio member of
over position beyond his term. the sangguniang bayan. However,when the new LGC
of 1991 finally took effect, Rodolfo Lasay filed a case
HELD: against Galarosa in his capacity as taxpayer
questioning the right of Galarosa to remain as an ex-
officio member of the Sangguniang Bayan. Lasay
Page | 79
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

claimed that the new LGC of 1991 provided for the power to investigate and impose
liga ng mga barangay, which, although admittedly Administrative sanctions against said local
was structurally and functionally the same as officials, as well as to effect their Preventive
katipunan ng mga barangay, nevertheless abolished Suspension had now been vested with the
the katipunan ng mga barangay, thereby a new set Office of the President.
of officers have to be appointed by the President of
the Philippines. ISSUE:

ISSUE: Whether Ombudsman has been divested of his


authority to conduct administrative
Whether Galarosa can continue to serve as a investigation over local elective officials by
member of Sangguniang Bayan beyond the term of virtue LGC of 1991 granting such authority to
his office. the Office of the President.

HELD: HELD:

Yes. The rule is settled that unless holding over be No. We reach the foregoing conclusion, however,
expressly or impliedly prohibited, the incumbent may without necessarily subscribing to petitioners claim
continue to hold over until someone else is elected that the Local Government Code, which he averred
and qualified to assume the office. This rule is should apply to this case of an elective local official,
demanded by the most obvious requirements of has been violated. True, under said Code, preventive
public policy, for without it there must frequently be suspension may only be imposed after the issues are
cases where, from a failure to elect or a refusal or joined, and only for a maximum period of sixty days.
neglect to qualify, the office would be vacant and the Here, petitioner was suspended without having had
public service entirely suspended. Otherwise stated, the chance to refute first the charges against him,
the purpose is to prevent a hiatus in the government and for the maximum period of six months provided
pending the time when the successor may be chosen by the Ombudsman Law. But as respondents argue,
and inducted into office. (Sandoval Notes) administrative complaints commenced under the
Ombudsman Law are distinct from those initiated
HON. JUAN M. HAGAD, in his capacity as under the Local Government Code. Respondents
Deputy Ombudsman for the Visayas vs. point out that the shorter period of suspension under
HON. MERCEDES GOZO-DADOLE, Presiding the Local Government Code is intended to limit the
Judge, Branch XXVIII, Regional Trial Court, period of suspension that may be imposed by a
G.R. No. 108072 December 12, 1995 mayor, a governor, or the President, who may be
motivated by partisan political considerations. In
contrast the Ombudsman, who can impose a longer
VITUG, J.: period of preventive suspension, is not likely to be
similarly motivated because it is a constitutional
FACTS: body. The distinction is valid but not decisive, in our
view, of whether there has been grave abuse of
Respondents, who are all public officials of discretion in a specific case of preventive suspension.
Mandaue City were complained crimall and
administratively before the Ombudsman by Xxx
Mandaue City Councilors Dionson and Bercedo
for alleged Alteration and/or falsification of an Respondents may be correct in pointing out the
Ordinance by increasing the allocated reason for the shorter period of preventive
appropriation without authority from the suspension imposable under the Local Government
Sanguniang Panlungsod of Mandaue City. Code. Political color could taint the exercise of the
power to suspend local officials by the mayor,
Councilors Dionson and Bercede also moved governor, or Presidents office. In contrast the
for the respondents preventive suspension Ombudsman, considering the constitutional origin of
which the latter opposed and prayed for the his Office, always ought to be insulated from the
dismissal of the case on the ground that vagaries of politics, as respondents would have us
Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to try, hear believe.
and decide the administrative case against
them since Sec. 63 of LGC of 1991 granted the
Page | 80
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

On the matter of whether or not the Ombudsman ISSUE:


has been stripped of his power to investigate local
elective officials by virtue of the Local Government Whether Antonios resignation was complete and
Code, we said: Indeed, there is nothing in the Local whether respondent abandoned his membership in
Government Code to indicate that it has repealed, the SB.
whether expressly or impliedly, the pertinent
provisions of the Ombudsman Act. The two statutes HELD:
on the specific matter in question are not so
inconsistent, let alone irreconcilable, as to compel us The resignation was not complete for lack of
to only uphold one and strike down the other. acceptance thereof of the proper authority however,
an office may still be deemed relinquished through
SANGGUNIANG BAYAN OF SAN ANDRES, voluntary abandonment which needs no acceptance.
CATANDUANES vs. COURT OF APPEALS and In Ortiz vs Comelec, resignation is defined as the act
AUGUSTO T. ANTONIO of giving up of an officer by which he declines his
[G.R. No. 118883. January 16, 1998] office and renounces the further right to use it.

PANGANIBAN, J.: It can be express or implied. To constitute a


complete and operative resignation the
FACTS: following must be present.

Antonio, priate respondent, was elected barangay (a) an intention to relinquish a part of the term;
captain of Sapang Palay Catanduanes on March (b) an act of relinquishment; and
1989. He was later elected president of the (c) an acceptance by the proper authority.
Association of Barangay Council (ABC) for the
Municiplity of San Andres Catanduanes. Pursuant to In the case at bar, there was no evidence that the
the Local Government Code of 1983, he was private respondents resignation was accepted by the
appointed by the President as Member of the proper authority. Although the Local Government
Sanguniang Bayan of the sid municipality. Code of 1983 was silent as to who specifically should
Meanwhile, DILG Sec. declared the election for the accept the resignation it provides that the position
president of the Federation of the Association of shall be deemed vacated only upon acceptance of
Barangay Council (FABC) void for lack of quorum. As resignation and should be acted upon by the
a result, the provincial council was reorganized. Sangunian concerned.

DILG Sec then designated private respondent as a The resignation letter was tendered to the mayor and
temporary member of the Sanguniang Panlalawigan copies were sent to the governor, DILG and the
of Catanduanes effective on 15 June 1990. Because municipal treasurer but none of them expressly acted
of his designation, private respondent tendered his on it. Furthermore, under established jurisprudence,
resignation as a member of the Sanguniang Bayan resignations, in the absence of statutory provisions
dated 14 June 1990 to the Mayor of San Andres as to whom it should be submitted, should be
Catanduanes. Copies of his letters were also submitted to the appointing power.
forwarded to the provincial governor, DILG and the
municipal treasurer. Subsequently, Aquino then the Therefore, the resignation should have been
Vice President of ABC was appointed by the submitted to the president or to the DILG as the
provincial governor as member of the Sanguniang presidents alter ego. Tackling the second issue,
Bayan in place of private respondent. abandonment has been defined as the voluntary
relinquishment of an office by the holder, with the
Aquino assumed office on 18 July 1980 after taking intention of terminating his possession and control
his oath. Subsequently, the ruling of the DILG thereof. It is a species of resignation. While
annulling the election of the FABC president was resignation is the formal relinquishment,
reversed by the Supreme Court and declared abandonment is the voluntary relinquishment by
the appointment of private respondent void for non-user.
lacking the essential qualification of being the
president of FABC. On 31 March 1992, private
respondent wrote to the Sanguniang Bayan (SB) of
San Andres regarding his re-assumption of his
original position. SB refused.
Page | 81
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

There are 2 essential elements of with the officers actual or imputed intention to
abandonment: abandon and relinquish the office. Abandonment of
an office is not wholly a matter of intention; it results
(1) an intention to abandon and from a complete abandonment of duties of such
(2) an overt act by which intention is carried on. continuance that the law will infer a relinquishment.
Therefore, there are two essential elements of
In the case at bar, the first element abandonment; first, an intention to abandon and,
was manifested on the following instances: second, an overt or external act by which the
intention is carried into effect. (Sandoval Notes)
(1) private respondents failure to perform his
function as SB;
JOSEPH E. ESTRADA, petitioner, vs. ANIANO
(2) his failure to collect the corresponding
DESIERTO, in his capacity as Ombudsman
remuneration for the position,
[G.R. Nos. 146710-15. March 2, 2001]
(3)his failure to object to the appointment of Aquino
as his replacement to SB and
PUNO, J.:
(4) his prolonged failure to initiate any act to
reassume his post in the SB after SC had nullified his
FACTS:
designation as member of Sanguniang Panlalawigan.

The case basically revolves around the series of


The second element was demonstrated by the
events that happened prior and subsequent to the
following:
event we know as EDSA II. During the 1998
(1) his letter of resignation,
elections, Joseph E. Estrada and Gloria Macapagal
(2) his assumption of office as member of the
Arroyo were elected as president and vice-president
Sanguniang Panlalawigan,
respectively. The downfall of the Estrada
(3) his faithful discharge of his duties and functions
administration began when For. Gov. Luis Chavit
of SP and
Singson went to the media and released his expos
(4) his receipt of remuneration for such post.
that petitioner was part of the Jueteng scandal as
It is the act of giving up or the act of an officer by having received large sums of money. After this
which he declines his office and renounces the expose, a lot of different groups and many
further right to use it. It is an expression of the personalities had asked for the resignation of the
incumbent in some form, express or implied, of the petitioner. Some of which are the Catholic Bishops
intention to surrender, renounce, and relinquish the Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), Sen. Nene
office and the acceptance by competent and lawful Pimentel, Archbishop of Manila, Jaime Cardinal Sin,
authority. To constitute a complete and operative For. Pres. Fidel Ramos, and For. Pres. Corazon
resignation from public office, there must be: (a) an Aquino who asked petitioner to make the supreme
intention to relinquish a part of the term; (b) an act self-sacrifice. Respondent also resigned as
of relinquishment; and (c) an acceptance by the Secretary of the Department of Social Welfare and
proper authority. The last one is required by reason Services and also asked petitioner for his resignation.
of Article 238 of the Revised Penal Code. 4 senior economic advisers of the petitioner resigned
and then Speaker Manny Villar, together with 47
Abandonment of an office has been defined as the representatives, defected from Lapian ng Masang
voluntary relinquishment of an office by the holder, Pilipino.
with the intention of terminating his possession and
control thereof. Indeed, abandonment of office is a By November, an impeachment case was to be held
species of resignation; while resignation in general is as Speaker Manny Villar had transmitted the Articles
a formal relinquishment, abandonment is a voluntary of Impeachment to the senate. On November 20, the
relinquishment through nonuser. Abandonment 21 senators took oath as judges to the impeachment
springs from and is accompanied by deliberation and trial with SC CJ Hilario Davide, Jr., presiding. The
freedom of choice. Its concomitant effect is that the impeachment trial was one for the ages. It was a
former holder of an office can no longer legally battle royal of well-known lawyers. But then came
repossess it even by forcible re-occupancy. Clear the fateful day, when by the vote of 11-10, the
intention to abandon should be manifested by the judges came to a decision to not open the second
officer concerned. Such intention may be express or envelop allegedly containing evidence showing that
inferred from his own conduct. Thus, the failure to the petitioner had a secret bank account under the
perform the duties pertaining to the office must be name Jose Velarde containing P3.3 billion. The not
Page | 82
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

opening of the 2nd envelop resulted to the people and duties of my office. By operation of law and the
going to the streets and the public prosecutors Constitution, the Vice-President shall be the Acting
withdrawing from the trial. On January 19, AFP Chief President.
of Staff Angelo Reyes marched to EDSA shrine and
declared on behalf of your Armed Forces, the (Sgd.) JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA
130,000 strong members of the Armed Forces, we
wish to announce that we are withdrawing our On January 22, this Court issued the following
support to this government. PNP Chief, Director Resolution in Administrative Matter No. 01-1-05-SC.
General Panfilo Lacson together with some Cabinet The said resolution confirmed the authority given by
members made the same announcement. the 12 SC justices to the CJ during the oath taking
June 20 was the day of surrender. At around 12:20 that happened on January 20. Soon, other countries
AM, negotiations started for the peaceful transition accepted the respondent as the new president of the
of power. But at around 12 noon, respondent took Philippines. The House then passed Resolution No.
oath as the 14th president of the Philippines. At 2:30 175 expressing the full support of the House of
PM, petitioner and his family left Malacanang. He Representatives to the administration of Her
issued the following Press Statement: Excellency Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, President of the
Philippines. It also approved Resolution No. 176
20 January 2001 expressing the support of the House of
STATEMENT FROM Representatives to the assumption into office by Vice
PRESIDENT JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as President of
the Republic of the Philippines, extending its
At twelve oclock noon today, Vice President Gloria congratulations and expressing its support for her
Macapagal-Arroyo took her oath as President of the administration as a partner in the attainment of the
Republic of the Philippines. While along with many nations goals under the Constitution.
other legal minds of our country, I have strong and
serious doubts about the legality and On February 6, respondent recommended Teofisto
constitutionality of her proclamation as President, I Guingona to be the vice president. On February 7,
do not wish to be a factor that will prevent the the Senate adopted Resolution 82 which confirmed
restoration of unity and order in our civil society. the nomination of Senator Guingona. On the same
day, the Senate passed Resolution No. 83 declaring
It is for this reason that I now leave Malacaang that the impeachment court is functus officio and
Palace, the seat of the presidency of this country, for has been terminated. Several cases were filed
the sake of peace and in order to begin the healing against the petitioner which are as follows: (1) OMB
process of our nation. I leave the Palace of our Case No. 0-00-1629, filed by Ramon A. Gonzales on
people with gratitude for the opportunities given to October 23, 2000 for bribery and graft and
me for service to our people. I will not shirk from corruption; (2) OMB Case No. 0-00-1754 filed by the
any future challenges that may come ahead in the Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption on
same service of our country. November 17, 2000 for plunder, forfeiture, graft and
I call on all my supporters and followers to join me corruption, bribery, perjury, serious misconduct,
in the promotion of a constructive national spirit of violation of the Code of Conduct for government
reconciliation and solidarity. Employees, etc; (3) OMB Case No. 0-00-1755 filed
by the Graft Free Philippines Foundation, Inc. on
May the Almighty bless our country and beloved November 24, 2000 for plunder, forfeiture, graft and
people. corruption, bribery, perjury, serious misconduct; (4)
OMB Case No. 0-00-1756 filed by Romeo Capulong,
MABUHAY! et al., on November 28, 2000 for malversation of
(Sgd.) JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA public funds, illegal use of public funds and property,
plunder, etc., (5) OMB Case No. 0-00-1757 filed by
It also appears that on the same day, January 20, Leonard de Vera, et al., on November 28, 2000 for
2001, he signed the following letter: bribery, plunder, indirect bribery, violation of PD
1602, PD 1829, PD 46, and RA 7080; and (6) OMB
Sir: Case No. 0-00-1758 filed by Ernesto B. Francisco, Jr.
on December 4, 2000 for plunder, graft and
By virtue of the provisions of Section 11, Article VII corruption.
of the Constitution, I am hereby transmitting this
declaration that I am unable to exercise the powers
Page | 83
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

A special panel of investigators was forthwith created cases at bar while they are still pending decision by
by the respondent Ombudsman to investigate the the Court, and
charges against the petitioner. It is chaired by
Overall Deputy Ombudsman Margarito P. Gervasio (3) to issue a 30-day status quo order effective
with the following as members, viz: Director Andrew immediately enjoining the respondent Ombudsman
Amuyutan, Prosecutor Pelayo Apostol, Atty. Jose de from resolving or deciding the criminal cases pending
Jesus and Atty. Emmanuel Laureso. On January 22, investigation in his office against petitioner Joseph E.
the panel issued an Order directing the petitioner to Estrada and subject of the cases at bar, it appearing
file his counter-affidavit and the affidavits of his from news reports that the respondent Ombudsman
witnesses as well as other supporting documents in may immediately resolve the cases against petitioner
answer to the aforementioned complaints against Joseph E. Estrada seven (7) days after the hearing
him. held on February 15, 2001, which action will make
the cases at bar moot and academic.
Thus, the stage for the cases at bar was set. On
February 5, petitioner filed with this Court GR No. ISSUES:
146710-15, a petition for prohibition with a prayer
for a writ of preliminary injunction. It sought to 1. Whether petitioner Estrada is a President on leave
enjoin the respondent Ombudsman from while respondent Arroyo is an Acting President. NO
conducting any further proceedings in Case Nos.
OMB 0-00-1629, 1754, 1755, 1756, 1757 and 1758 2. Whether conviction in the impeachment
or in any other criminal complaint that may be filed proceedings is a condition precedent for the criminal
in his office, until after the term of petitioner as prosecution of petitioner Estrada. In the negative
President is over and only if legally warranted. Thru and on the assumption that petitioner is still
another counsel, petitioner, on February 6, filed GR President, whether he is immune from criminal
No. 146738 for Quo Warranto. He prayed for prosecution.
judgment confirming petitioner to be the lawful and (NO. The impeachment proceedings was already
incumbent President of the Republic of the aborted. As a non-sitting president, he is not entitled
Philippines temporarily unable to discharge the to immunity from criminal prosecution)
duties of his office, and declaring respondent to have
taken her oath as and to be holding the Office of the HELD:
President, only in an acting capacity pursuant to the
provisions of the Constitution. Acting on GR Nos. I. Whether or not petitioner resigned as
146710-15, the Court, on the same day, February 6, President.
required the respondents to comment thereon
within a non-extendible period expiring on 12 Resignation is a factual question and
February 2001. On February 13, the Court ordered its elements are beyond quibble: there must be an
the consolidation of GR Nos. 146710-15 and GR No. intent to resign and the intent must be coupled by
146738 and the filing of the respondents comments acts of relinquishment. There is no required form of
on or before 8:00 a.m. of February 15. resignation. It can be expressed, implied, oral or
written. It is true that respondent never wrote a
In a resolution dated February 20, acting on the letter of resignation before he left Malacanang on
urgent motion for copies of resolution and press June 20, 2001. In this issue, the Court would use the
statement for Gag Order on respondent totality test or the totality of prior, contemporaneous
Ombudsman filed by counsel for petitioner in G.R. and posterior facts and circumstantial evidence
No. 146738, the Court resolved: bearing a material relevance on the issue.

(1) to inform the parties that the Court did not issue Using this test, the Court rules that the petitioner had
a resolution on January 20, 2001 declaring the office resigned. The Court knows the amount of stress that
of the President vacant and that neither did the Chief the petitioner had suffered. With just a blink of an
Justice issue a press statement justifying the alleged eye, he lost the support of the legislative when then
resolution; Manny Villar and other Representatives had
defected. AFP Chief of Staff General Angelo Reyes
(2) to order the parties and especially their counsel had already gone to EDSA. PNP Chief Director
who are officers of the Court under pain of being General Panfilo Lacson and other cabinet secretaries
cited for contempt to refrain from making any had withdrawn as well. By looking into the Angara
comment or discussing in public the merits of the diaries, it was pointed out that the petitioner had
Page | 84
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

suggested a snap election at May on which he would


not be a candidate. Proposing a snap election in It is for this reason that I now leave Malacaang
which he is not a candidate means that he had intent Palace, the seat of the presidency of this country, for
to resign. When the proposal for a dignified exit or the sake of peace and in order to begin the healing
resignation was proposed, petitioner did not disagree process of our nation. I leave the Palace of our
but listened closely. This is proof that petitioner had people with gratitude for the opportunities given to
reconciled himself to the reality that he had to me for service to our people. I will not shrik from
resign. His mind was already concerned with the any future challenges that may come ahead in the
five-day grace period he could stay in the palace. It same service of our country.
was a matter of time.
I call on all my supporters and followers to join me
The negotiations that had happened were about a in the promotion of a constructive national spirit of
peaceful transfer of power. It was already implied reconciliation and solidarity.
that petitioner would resign. The negotiations
concentrated on the following: (1) the transition May the Almighty bless our country and our beloved
period of five days after the petitioners resignation; people.
(2) the guarantee of the safety of the petitioner and
his family, and (3) the agreement to open the second MABUHAY!
envelope to vindicate the name of the petitioner.
Also taken from the Angara diaries, The President By making such statement, petitioner impliedly
says. Pagod na pagod na ako. Ayoko na masyado affirms the following: (1) he acknowledged the oath-
nang masakit. Pagod na ako sa red tape, taking of the respondent as President of the
bureaucracy, intriga. (I am very tired. I dont want Republic albeit with the reservation about its
any more of this its too painful. Im tired of the legality; (2) he emphasized he was leaving the
red tape, the bureaucracy, the intrigue.) I just want Palace, the seat of the presidency, for the sake of
to clear my name, then I will go. The quoted peace and in order to begin the healing process of
statement of the petitioner was a clear evidence that our nation. He did not say he was leaving the Palace
he has resigned. due to any kind of inability and that he was going to
re-assume the presidency as soon as the disability
The second round of negotiations were about the disappears; (3) he expressed his gratitude to the
consolidating of the clauses which were proposed by people for the opportunity to serve them. Without
both sides. The second round of negotiation cements doubt, he was referring to the past opportunity given
the reading that the petitioner has resigned. It will him to serve the people as President; (4) he assured
be noted that during this second round of that he will not shirk from any future challenge that
negotiation, the resignation of the petitioner was may come ahead in the same service of our
again treated as a given fact. The only unsettled country. Petitioners reference is to a future
points at that time were the measures to be challenge after occupying the office of the
undertaken by the parties during and after the president which he has given up; and (5) he called
transition period. on his supporters to join him in the promotion of a
constructive national spirit of reconciliation and
When everything was already signed by the side of solidarity. Certainly, the national spirit of
the petitioner and ready to be faxed by Angara, the reconciliation and solidarity could not be attained if
negotiator for the respondent, Angelo Reyes, called he did not give up the presidency.
to Angara saying that the SC would allow respondent
to have her oath taking. Before petitioner left Petitioner however argues that he only took a
Malacanang, he made a last statement. temporary leave of absence. This is evidenced by a
letter which reads as follows:
The statement reads: At twelve oclock noon today,
Vice President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo took her Sir
oath as President of the Republic of the By virtue of the provisions of Section II, Article VII of
Philippines. While along with many other legal minds the Constitution, I am hereby transmitting this
of our country, I have strong and serious doubts declaration that I am unable to exercise the powers
about the legality and constitutionality of her and duties of my office. By operation of law and the
proclamation as president, I do not wish to be a Constitution, the Vice President shall be the Acting
factor that will prevent the restoration of unity and President.
order in our civil society.
Page | 85
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

(Sgd.) Joseph Ejercito Estrada Ombudsman lacked jurisdiction to act on


them. Section 12 of RA No. 3019 cannot therefore
The Court was surprised that the petitioner did not be invoked by the petitioner for it contemplates of
use this letter during the week long crisis. It would cases whose investigation or prosecution do not
be very easy for him to say before he left Malacanang suffer from any insuperable legal obstacle like the
that he was temporarily unable to govern, thus, he immunity from suit of a sitting President.
is leaving Malacanang. Under any circumstance,
however, the mysterious letter cannot negate the Petitioner contends that the impeachment
resignation of the petitioner. If it was proceeding is an administrative investigation that,
prepared before the press release of the petitioner under section 12 of RA 3019, bars him from
clearly showing his resignation from the presidency, resigning. The Court holds otherwise. The
then the resignation must prevail as a later act. If, impeachment proceeding may be arguable.
however, it was prepared afterthe press release, still, However, even if the impeachment proceeding is
it commands scant legal significance. administrative, it cannot be considered pending
because the process had already broke down. There
Petitioner also argues that he could not resign. His was also a withdrawal by the prosecutors to partake
legal basis is RA 3019 which states: in the impeachment case. In fact, the proceeding
was postponed indefinitely. In fact, there was no
Sec. 12. No public officer shall be allowed to resign impeachment case pending when he resigned.
or retire pending an investigation, criminal or
administrative, or pending a prosecution against him, II. Whether or not the petitioner is only
for any offense under this Act or under the provisions temporarily unable to act as President
of the Revised Penal Code on bribery.
This issue arose from the January 20 letter which
During the amendments, another section was was addressed to then Speaker Fuentebella and then
inserted which states that: Senate President Pimentel. Petitioners contention is
that he is a president on leave and that the
During the period of amendments, the following respondent is an acting president. This contention is
provision was inserted as section 15: the centerpiece of petitioners stance that he is
Sec. 15. Termination of office No public official a President on leave and respondent Arroyo is only
shall be allowed to resign or retire pending an an Acting President.
investigation, criminal or administrative, or pending
a prosecution against him, for any offense under the An examination of section 11, Article VII is in
Act or under the provisions of the Revised Penal order. It provides:
Code on bribery.
SEC. 11. Whenever the President transmit to the
The separation or cessation of a public official from President of the Senate and the Speaker of the
office shall not be a bar to his prosecution under this House of Representatives his written declaration that
Act for an offense committed during his he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of
incumbency. his office, and until he transmits to them a written
declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties
The original senate bill was rejected because of the shall be discharged by the Vice-President as Acting
2nd paragraph of section 15. Nonetheless, another President.
similar bill was passed. Section 15 then became
section 13. There is another reason why petitioners Whenever a majority of all the Members of the
contention should be rejected. In the cases at bar, Cabinet transmit to the President of the Senate and
the records show that when petitioner resigned on to the Speaker of the House of Representatives their
January 20, 2001, the cases filed against him before written declaration that the President is unable to
the Ombudsman were OMB Case Nos. 0-00-1629, 0- discharge the powers and duties of his office, the
00-1755, 0-00-1756, 0-00-1757 and 0-00-1758. Vice-President shall immediately assume the powers
While these cases have been filed, the respondent and duties of the office as Acting President.
Ombudsman refrained from conducting the
preliminary investigation of the petitioner for the Thereafter, when the President transmits to the
reason that as the sitting President then, petitioner President of the Senate and to the Speaker of the
was immune from suit. Technically, the said cases House of Representatives his written declaration that
cannot be considered as pending for the no inability exists, he shall reassume the powers and
Page | 86
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

duties of his office. Meanwhile, should a majority of ARTICLE VI, Section 13:
all the Members of the Cabinet transmit within five
days to the President of the Senate and to the No Senator or Member of the House of
Speaker of the House of Representatives their Representatives may hold any other office or
written declaration that the President is unable to employment in the Government, or any subdivision,
discharge the powers and duties of his office, the agency, or instrumentality thereof, including
Congress shall decide the issue? For that purpose, government-owned or controlled corporations or
the Congress shall convene, if it is not in session, their subsidiaries, during his term without forfeiting
within forty-eight hours, in accordance with its rules his seat. Neither shall he be appointed to any office
and without need of call. which may have been created or the emoluments
thereof increased during the term for which he was
If the Congress, within ten days after receipt of the elected.
last written declaration, or, if not in session within
twelve days after it is required to assemble, ARTICLE IX
determines by a two-thirds vote of both Houses, C. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS
voting separately, that the President is unable to
discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Section 1.
Vice-President shall act as President; otherwise, the
President shall continue exercising the powers and There shall be a Commission on Elections composed
duties of his office." of a Chairman and six Commissioners who shall be
natural-born citizens of the Philippines and, at the
After studying in-depth the series of events that time of their appointment, at least thirty-five years
happened after petitioner left Malacanang, it is very of age, holders of a college degree, and must not
clear that the inability of the petitioner as president have been candidates for any elective positions in
is not temporary. The question is whether this Court the immediately preceding elections. However, a
has jurisdiction to review the claim of temporary majority thereof, including the Chairman, shall be
inability of petitioner Estrada and thereafter revise members of the Philippine Bar who have been
the decision of both Houses of Congress recognizing engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.
respondent Arroyo as President of the Philippines. The Chairman and the Commissioners shall be
The Court says that they cannot, for such is an appointed by the President with the consent of the
example of a political question, in which the matter Commission on Appointments for a term of seven
has solely been left to the legislative, years without reappointment. Of those first
appointed, three Members shall hold office for seven
years, two Members for five years, and the last
NOTES: Members for three years, without reappointment.
Appointment to any vacancy shall be only for the
ARTICLE XI unexpired term of the predecessor. In no case shall
ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS any Member be appointed or designated in a
temporary or acting capacity.
Section 1. Public office is a public trust. Public
officers and employees must, at all times, be Section 2. The Commission on Elections shall
accountable to the people, serve them with utmost exercise the following powers and functions:
responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency; act
with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives. Enforce and administer all laws and regulations
relative to the conduct of an election, plebiscite,
Section 2. The President, the Vice-President, the initiative, referendum, and recall.
Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the
Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman Exercise exclusive original jurisdiction over all
may be removed from office on impeachment for, contests relating to the elections, returns, and
and conviction of, culpable violation of the qualifications of all elective regional, provincial, and
Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, city officials, and appellate jurisdiction over all
other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust. All contests involving elective municipal officials decided
other public officers and employees may be removed by trial courts of general jurisdiction, or involving
from office as provided by law, but not by elective barangay officials decided by trial courts of
impeachment. limited jurisdiction.

Page | 87
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

Decisions, final orders, or rulings of the Commission violation or disregard of, or disobedience to, its
on election contests involving elective municipal and directive, order, or decision.
barangay offices shall be final, executory, and not
appealable. Submit to the President and the Congress, a
comprehensive report on the conduct of each
Decide, except those involving the right to vote, all election, plebiscite, initiative, referendum, or recall.
questions affecting elections, including Section 3. The Commission on Elections may sit en
determination of the number and location of polling banc or in two divisions, and shall promulgate its
places, appointment of election officials and rules of procedure in order to expedite disposition of
inspectors, and registration of voters. election cases, including pre- proclamation
controversies. All such election cases shall be heard
Deputize, with the concurrence of the President, law and decided in division, provided that motions for
enforcement agencies and instrumentalities of the reconsideration of decisions shall be decided by the
Government, including the Armed Forces of the Commission en banc.
Philippines, for the exclusive purpose of ensuring
free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible Section 4. The Commission may, during the
elections. election period, supervise or regulate the enjoyment
or utilization of all franchises or permits for the
Register, after sufficient publication, political parties, operation of transportation and other public utilities,
organizations, or coalitions which, in addition to media of communication or information, all grants,
other requirements, must present their platform or special privileges, or concessions granted by the
program of government; and accredit citizens' arms Government or any subdivision, agency, or
of the Commission on Elections. Religious instrumentality thereof, including any government-
denominations and sects shall not be registered. owned or controlled corporation or its subsidiary.
Those which seek to achieve their goals through Such supervision or regulation shall aim to ensure
violence or unlawful means, or refuse to uphold and equal opportunity, time, and space ,and the right to
adhere to this Constitution, or which are supported reply, including reasonable, equal rates therefor, for
by any foreign government shall likewise be refused public information campaigns and forums among
registration. candidates in connection with the objective of
holding free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible
Financial contributions from foreign governments elections.
and their agencies to political parties, organizations,
coalitions, or candidates related to elections, Section 5. No pardon, amnesty, parole, or
constitute interference in national affairs, and, when suspension of sentence for violation of election laws,
accepted, shall be an additional ground for the rules, and regulations shall be granted by the
cancellation of their registration with the President without the favorable recommendation of
Commission, in addition to other penalties that may the Commission.
be prescribed by law.
Section 6. A free and open party system shall be
File, upon a verified complaint, or on its own allowed to evolve according to the free choice of the
initiative, petitions in court for inclusion or exclusion people, subject to the provisions of this Article.
of voters; investigate and, where appropriate,
prosecute cases of violations of election laws, PD 1606
including acts or omissions constituting election
frauds, offenses, and malpractices. Section 1.

Recommend to the Congress effective measures to Sandiganbayan; composition; qualifications;


minimize election spending, including limitation of tenure; removal and composition. A special
places where propaganda materials shall be posted, court, of the same level as the Court of Appeals and
and to prevent and penalize all forms of election possessing all the inherent powers of a court of
frauds, offenses, malpractices, and nuisance justice, to be known as the Sandiganbayan is hereby
candidacies. created composed of a Presiding Justice and eight
Associate Justices who shall be appointed by the
Recommend to the President the removal of any President.
officer or employee it has deputized, or the
imposition of any other disciplinary action, for
Page | 88
POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF LAW
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge

No person shall be appointed Presiding Justice or


Associate Justice of the Sandiganbayan; unless he is
a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, at least 40
years of age and for at least ten years has been a
judge of a court of record or been engaged in the
practice of law in the Philippines or has held office
requiring admission to the bar as a pre-requisite for
a like period.

The Presiding Justice shall be so designated in his


commission and the other Justices shall have
precedence according to the dates of their respective
commissions, or, when the commissions of two or
more of them shall bear the same date, according to
the order in which their commissions have been
issued by the President.

The Presiding Justice and the Associate Justices shall


not be removed from office except on impeachment
upon the grounds and in the manner provided for in
Sections 2, 3 and 4 of Article XIII of the 1973
Constitution.

The Presiding Justice shall receive an annual


compensation of P60,000.00 and each Associate
Justice P55,000.00 which shall not be diminished
during their continuance in office. They shall have
the same rank, privileges and other emoluments, be
subject to the same inhibitions and disqualifications,
and enjoy the same retirement and other benefits as
those provided for under existing laws of the
Presiding Justice and Associate Justices of the Court
of Appeals.

Whenever the salaries of the Presiding Justice and


the Associate Justices of the Court of Appeals are
increased, such increases in salaries shall be
correspondingly extended to and enjoyed by the
Presiding Justice and the Associate Justices of the
Sandiganbayan.

They shall hold office until they reach the age of 65


years or become incapacitated to discharge the
duties of their office.

Page | 89