In Re: Letter of Associate Justice Renato S. Puno, A.M. No.

90-11-2697-CA,
June 29, 1992

FACTS
:

• Petitioner Puno, a member of the CA wrote a letter dated Nov. 14, 1990 addressed
to the court seeking the correction of his seniority ranking in the CA. Petitioner was first
appointed as Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals on 1980 but took his oath for said
position only in Nov. 29, 1982 after serving in the office of the SolGen. On June 17, 1983, the
CA was reorganized and became IAC pursuant to Batasan Pambansa Blg. 129 “An Act
Reorganizing the Judiciary...”

• The EDSA Revolution in 1986 brought about reorganization of the entire govt.
including the judiciary. A Screening Committee was created. When Pres. Cory Aquino issued
Executive Order No. 33, as an exercise of her legislative power, the Screening Committee
assigned the petitioner to rank no. 11 from being the assoc. justice of the new CA.

• However, the petitioner's ranking changed from no. 11, he now ranked as no. 26.
He alleges that the change in his seniority ranking would be contrary to the provisions of issued
order of Pres. Aquino. The court en banc ranted Justice Puno's request. A motion for
consideration was later filed by Campos and Javelliano who were affected by the change of
ranking. They contend that the petitioner cannot claim such reappointment because the court
he had previously been appointed ceased to exist at the date of his last appointment.

ISSUES: Whether the present CA is a new court or merely a continuation of the CA and IAC
that would negate any claim to seniority enjoyed by the petitioner existing prior to said EO No.
33.

RULING
:

• The present CA is a new entity, different and distinct from the CA or the IAC, for it
was created in the wake of the massive reorganization launched by the revolutionary
government of Corazon Aquino in the people power. A revolution has been defined as the
complete overthrow of the established government in any country or state by those who were
previously subject to it as as sudden, radical, and fundamental change in the government or
political system, usually effected with violence.

• It has been said that “the locus of positive law-making power lies with the people of
the state” and from there is derived “the right of the people to abolish, to reform and to alter any
existing form of government without regard to the existing constitution.” It is assumed that the
legal order remains as a “culture system” of the polity as long as the latter endures and that a
point may be reached, however, where the legal system ceases to be operative as a whole for
it is no longer obeyed by the population nor enforced by the officials.
 • Aquino’s rise to the presidency was not due to constitutional processes; in fact, it
was achieved in violation of the provisions of the 1973 Constitution as a Batasang Pambansa
resolution had earlier declared Mr. Marcos as the winner in the 1986 presidential election. Thus,
it can be said that the organization of Mrs. Aquino’s Government which was met by little
resistance and her control of the state evidenced by the appointment of the Cabinet and other
key officers of the administration, the departure of the Marcos Cabinet officials, revamp of the
Judiciary and the Military signaled the point where the legal system then in effect, had ceased
to be obeyed by the Filipino.