Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Adminfinalsc
Adminfinalsc
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS AND ELECTION LAW REVIEWER 2017
Atty. Edgar P. Borge
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:
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
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.
ISSUE:
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
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
(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.
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.
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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:
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:
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
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
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
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:
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
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;
(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
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
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
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.:
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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.:
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
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
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:
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
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
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.
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
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 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:
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
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.
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
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.
Page | 89