LAUREL v. DESIERTO Exposition Project at the Clark Special Economic Zone.
This was referred to the
April 12, 2002 | Kapunan, J. | Public Officers
Digester: Chua, Gian Angelo
SUMMARY: The Ombudsman sought to indict petitioner former Vice President
Salvador Laurel for graft and corruption, among others, for alleged anomalies during his
tenure as Chair of the National Centennial Commission (NCC). NCC was mandated to
take charge of the nationwide preparations for the National Celebration of the
Philippine Centennial of the Declaration of Philippine Independence and the
Inauguration of the Malolos Congress. Petitioner filed a petition with the SC arguing
that the Ombudsman had no jurisdiction over him because he, as Chair of the NCC,
was not a public officer because the following elements of a public office were missing:
(1) the delegation of sovereign functions; (2) salary, since he purportedly did not receive
any compensation; and (3) continuance, the life of the NCC being temporary (ad-hoc).
SC denied petitioner’s petition and held that the NCC was a public office and that
petitioner was therefore a public officer.
DOCTRINE: (1) Delegation of Sovereign Functions: We hold that the NCC performs
executive functions. The executive power is generally defined as the power to enforce
and administer the laws. It is the power of carrying the laws into practical operation and
enforcing their due observance. The executive function, therefore, concerns the
implementation of the policies as set forth by law. NCC implements policies set forth
by the constitution and other issuances.
(2) Salary: A salary is a usual but not a necessary criterion for determining the nature of
the position. It is not conclusive. The salary is a mere incident and forms no part of the
office.
(3) Continuance: The element of continuance cannot be considered as indispensable,
for, if the other elements are present it can make no difference, whether there be but
one act or a series of acts to be done, whether the office expires as soon as the one act
is done, or is to be held for years or during good behavior.
FACTS:
 President Corazon Aquino issued AO 223 constituting a Committee for the
preparation of the National Centennial Celebration in 1998.
 Subsequently, President Fidel Ramos issued EO 128, reconstituting the Committee,
renaming it as National Centennial Commission (NCC). Appointed to chair
was Vice President Salvador Laurel (petitioner).
 The NCC was mandated to take charge of the nationwide preparations for the
National Celebration of the Philippine Centennial of the Declaration of Philippine
Independence and the Inauguration of the Malolos Congress.
 Subsequently, a corporation named the Philippine Centennial Expo 98
Corporation (Expocorp) was created. Petitioner was an incorporator, a director,
and was elected Expocorp Chief Executive Officer.
 Senator Ana Dominique Coseteng delivered a privilege speech in the Senate
denouncing alleged anomalies in the construction and operation of the Centennial
Blue Ribbon Committee for investigation.
 President Joseph Estrada issued AO 35, creating an ad hoc and independent
citizens committee to investigate all the facts and circumstances surrounding the
Philippine centennial projects, including its component activities. Former Senator
Rene Saguisag was appointed to chair the Committee (Saguisag Committee).
 The Blue Ribbon Committee and the Saguisag Committee, issuing separate reports,
recommended the further investigation by the Ombudsman and indictment of
petitioner for violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019),
and Article 217 of the RPC, among others.
 The Fact-finding and Intelligence Bureau of the Office of the Ombudsman
conducted preliminary investigation. It later issued a resolution finding probable
cause to indict petitioner. Ombudsman Aniano Desierto approved the resolution.
 Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari with the SC assailing the jurisdiction of the
Ombudsman alleging that he (petitioner), as Chair of the NCC, was not a public
officer.
RULING: Petition denied.
Whether petitioner, as Chair of NCC, was a public officer – YES.
 Neither the Constitution nor the Ombudsman Act of 1989 defines who public
officers are. A definition of public officers cited in jurisprudence is that provided by
Mechem, a recognized authority on the subject:
o A public office is the right, authority and duty, created and conferred
by law, by which, for a given period, either fixed by law or enduring
at the pleasure of the creating power, an individual is invested with
some portion of the sovereign functions of the government, to be
exercised by him for the benefit of the public. The individual so
invested is a public officer.
 The characteristics of a public office, according to Mechem, include the delegation
of sovereign functions, its creation by law and not by contract, an oath, salary,
continuance of the position, scope of duties, and the designation of the position as
an office.
 Petitioner submits that some of these characteristics are not present in the position
of NCC Chair, namely: (1) the delegation of sovereign functions; (2) salary, since he
purportedly did not receive any compensation; and (3) continuance, the tenure of
the NCC being temporary.
I. Delegation of Sovereign Functions
 Mechem describes the delegation to the individual of some of the sovereign
functions of government as the most important characteristic in determining
whether a position is a public office or not.
 We hold that the NCC performs executive functions. The executive power is
generally defined as the power to enforce and administer the laws. It is the power
of carrying the laws into practical operation and enforcing their due observance.
 The executive function, therefore, concerns the implementation of the policies
as set forth by law.
(1) The NCC implements policies
 Section 15, Article XIV, 1987 Constitution – Arts and letters shall enjoy the
patronage of the State. The State shall conserve, promote, and popularize the
nations historical and cultural heritage and resources, as well as artistic creations.
 Preamble, AO 223 – x x x Whereas, the centennial can effectively showcase
Filipino heritage and thereby strengthen Filipino values. x x x
 EO 128 – Cited the need to strengthen the said Committee to ensure a more
coordinated and synchronized celebrations of the Philippine Centennial and wider
participation from the government and non-government or private organizations.
It also referred to the need to rationalize the relevance of historical links with other
countries.
 The NCC was precisely created to execute the foregoing policies and
objectives, to carry them into effect. Thus, the Commission was vested with the
following functions – x x x (a) To undertake the overall study, conceptualization,
formulation and implementation of programs and projects on the utilization of
culture, arts, literature and media as vehicles for history, economic endeavors, and
reinvigorating the spirit of national unity and sense of accomplishment in every
Filipino in the context of the Centennial Celebrations. x x x (see notes for list)
 It bears noting the President, upon whom the executive power is vested, created
the NCC by executive order. Book III, Chapter 2, Section 2, Administrative Code
of 1987 describes the nature of executive orders – Acts of the President providing
for rules of a general or permanent character in implementation or execution of
constitutional or statutory powers shall be promulgated in executive orders.
 Moreover, NCC had a role in the countrys economic development, especially in
Central Luzon. Petitioner himself admitted in the oral arguments: x x x When I was
made Chairman I wanted the Expo to be in Batangas because I am a Batangeno but
President Ramos said Mr. Vice President the Central Luzon is suffering, suffering
because of the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo let us try to catalize economic recovery in
that area by putting this Expo in Clark Field and so it was done I agreed and Your
Honor if I may also mention we wanted to generate employment aside from
attracting business investments and employment. x x x
 There can hardly be any dispute that the promotion of industrialization and full
employment is a fundamental state policy.
(2) Petitioner invokes Torio vs. Fontanilla where it was held that the holding by a municipality of a
town fiesta is a proprietary rather than a governmental function. Petitioner argues that the holding of a
nationwide celebration which marked the nations 100th birthday may be likened to a national fiesta
which involved only the exercise of the national governments proprietary function.
 Torio, however, did not intend to lay down an all-encompassing doctrine. Note that
the Court cautioned that there can be no hard and fast rule for purposes of
determining the true nature of an undertaking or function of a municipality; the
surrounding circumstances of a particular case are to be considered and will be
decisive.
 Surely, a town fiesta cannot compare to the National Centennial Celebrations. The
Centennial Celebrations was meant to commemorate the birth of our nation after
centuries of struggle against our former colonial master, to memorialize the
liberation of our people from oppression by a foreign power. 1998 marked 100
years of independence and sovereignty as one united nation. The Celebrations was
an occasion to reflect upon our history and reinvigorate our patriotism and was a
vehicle for fostering nationhood and a strong sense of Filipino identity, an
opportunity to showcase Filipino heritage and thereby strengthen Filipino values.
(3) Clearly, the NCC performs sovereign functions. It is, therefore, a public office, and petitioner, as its
Chair, is a public officer.
II. Compensation
 That petitioner allegedly did not receive any compensation during his tenure is of
little consequence.
 A salary is a usual but not a necessary criterion for determining the nature of
the position. It is not conclusive. The salary is a mere incident and forms no
part of the office. Where a salary or fees is annexed, the office is provided for it is
a naked or honorary office, and is supposed to be accepted merely for the public
good.
 Hence, the office of petitioner as NCC Chair may be characterized as an honorary
office, as opposed to a lucrative office or an office of profit, i.e., one to which
salary, compensation or fees are attached. But it is a public office, nonetheless.
III. Continuance
 Neither is the fact that the NCC was characterized by E.O. No. 128 as an ad-hoc
body make said commission less of a public office.
 The element of continuance cannot be considered as indispensable, for, if
the other elements are present it can make no difference, whether there be
but one act or a series of acts to be done, whether the office expires as soon
as the one act is done, or is to be held for years or during good behavior.
IV. Conclusion
 Our conclusion that petitioner is a public officer finds support in In Re Corliss.
There the Supreme Court of Rhode Island ruled that the office of Commissioner of
the United States Centennial Commission is an office of trust as to disqualify its
holder as elector of the United States President and Vice-President. (Under Article
II of the United States Constitution, a person holding an office of trust or profit
under the United States is disqualified from being appointed an elector.)
 Having arrived at the conclusion that the NCC performs executive functions and is,
therefore, a public office, we need no longer delve at length on the issue of whether
Expocorp is a private or a public corporation. Even assuming that Expocorp is a
private corporation, petitioners position as Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of
 Expocorp arose from his Chairmanship of the NCC. Consequently, his acts or
omissions as CEO of Expocorp must be viewed in the light of his powers and
functions as NCC Chair.
Whether petitioner is a public officer as defined in RA 3019 – TO BE
DETERMINED BY THE TRIAL COURT.
 Petitioner argues that since he supposedly did not receive any compensation for his
services as NCC or Expocorp Chair, he is not a public officer as defined in RA
3019 and is, therefore, beyond the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman.
 A public officer, under R.A. No. 3019, is defined by Section 2 – Public officer
includes elective and appointive officials and employees, permanent or temporary,
whether in the classified or unclassified or exemption service receiving
compensation, even nominal, from the government as defined in the preceding
paragraph.
 It is clear from Section 2 (b), above, that the definition of a public officer is
expressly limited to the application of RA 3019. Said definition does not apply for
purposes of determining the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction, as defined by the
Constitution and the Ombudsman Act of 1989
 Moreover, the question of whether petitioner is a public officer under the RA
3019 involves the appreciation of evidence and interpretation of law, matters
that are best resolved at trial.
 The use of the term includes in Section 2 (b) indicates that the definition is not
restrictive. The Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act is just one of several laws that
define public officers. The RPC, Administrative Code of 1987, and Code of
Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees also has
definitions of public officer.
 But even assuming that the definition of public officer in R.A. No. 3019 is
exclusive, the term compensation, which is not defined by said law, has many
meanings.
 How then is compensation, as the term is used in Section 2 (b) of RA 3019, to be
interpreted? Did petitioner receive any compensation at all as NCC Chair?
Granting that petitioner did not receive any salary, the records do not reveal if he
received any allowance, fee, honorarium, or some other form of compensation.
Notably, under the by-laws of Expocorp, the CEO is entitled to per diems and
compensation. Would such fact bear any significance?
 Obviously, this proceeding is not the proper forum to settle these issues lest we
preempt the trial court from resolving them.
NOTES:
 Petitioner, citing Uy v. Sandiganbayan, also argued that the jurisdiction of the
Ombudsman was limited to cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan i.e., over public
officers of Grade 27 and higher. As petitioner’s position was purportedly not
classified as Grade 27 or higher, the Sandiganbayan and, consequently, the
Ombudsman, would have no jurisdiction over him.
 But the Court said that the ruling in Uy, however, was short-lived. Upon motion
for clarification by the Ombudsman in the same case, the Court set aside the
foregoing pronouncement in its Resolution dated March 20, 2001. The Court
explained the rationale for this reversal:
o The power to investigate and to prosecute granted by law to the
Ombudsman is plenary and unqualified. It pertains to any act or
omission of any public officer or employee when such act or
omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper or inefficient.
The law does not make a distinction between cases cognizable by the
Sandiganbayan and those cognizable by regular courts.
o Section 15 of RA 6770 gives the Ombudsman primary jurisdiction
over cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan. The law defines such
primary jurisdiction as authorizing the Ombudsman to take over, at
any stage, from any investigatory agency of the government, the
investigation of such cases. The grant of this authority does not
necessarily imply the exclusion from its jurisdiction of cases involving
public officers and employees by other courts.
o In sum, the Ombudsman has the power to investigate any
malfeasance, misfeasance and non-feasance by a public officer or
employee of the government, or of any subdivision, agency or
instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled
corporations.
 Functions of the NCC
o (a) To undertake the overall study, conceptualization, formulation
and implementation of programs and projects on the utilization of
culture, arts, literature and media as vehicles for history, economic
endeavors, and reinvigorating the spirit of national unity and sense of
accomplishment in every Filipino in the context of the Centennial
Celebrations. In this regard, it shall include a Philippine National
Exposition 98 within Metro Manila, the original eight provinces, and
Clark Air Base as its major venues;
o (b) To act as principal coordinator for all the activities related to
awareness and celebration of the Centennial;
o (c) To serve as the clearing house for the preparation and
dissemination of all information about the plans and events for the
Centennial Celebrations;
o (d) To constitute working groups which shall undertake the
implementation of the programs and projects;
o (e) To prioritize the refurbishment of historical sites and structures
nationwide. In this regard, the Commission shall formulate schemes
(e.g. lease-maintained-and-transfer, build-operate-transfer, and similar
arrangements) to ensure the preservation and maintenance of the
historical sites and structures;
o (f) To call upon any government agency or instrumentality and
corporation, and to invite private individuals and organizations to
assist it in the performance of its tasks; and,
o (g) Submit regular reports to the President on the plans, programs,
projects, activities as well as the status of the preparations for the
Celebration.