G.R. No.

79974
Sarmiento vs Mison
December 17, 1987
FACTS:
● Sarmiento & Arcilla, taxpayers and members of the Bar filed a petition for prohibition
against Mison and Carague (Secretary of the Department of Budget) from performing
functions of the Office of the Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs and effecting
disbursements in payment of Mison's salaries and emoluments, respectively because Mison’s
appointment was unconstitutional as it was not confirmed by the Commission on
Appointments.
● Mison and Carague maintain that appointment is constitutional.
ISSUE:
Whether or not appointment is valid if it was not confirmed by Commission on Appointments?
YES
RULING:

Section 16, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution says:

The President shall nominate and, with the consent of the Commission on Appointments,
appoint the heads of the executive departments, ambassadors, other public ministers and
consuls, or officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain, and other
officers whose appointments are vested in him in this Constitution. He shall also appoint all other
officers of the Government whose appointments are not otherwise provided for by law, and those
whom he may be authorized by law to appoint. The Congress may, by law, vest the appointment
of other officers lower in rank in the President alone, in the courts, or in the heads of the
departments, agencies, commissions or boards.

The President shall have the power to make appointments during the recess of the Congress, whether
voluntary or compulsory, but such appointments shall be effective only until disapproval by the
Commission on Appointments or until the next adjournment of the Congress.

It is readily apparent that under the provisions of the 1987 Constitution, just quoted, there are four (4)
groups of officers whom the President shall appoint. These four (4) groups, to which we will
hereafter refer from time to time, are:

First, the heads of the executive departments, ambassadors, other public ministers and
consuls, officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain, and other
officers whose appointments are vested in him in this Constitution;

Second, all other officers of the Government whose appointments are not otherwise provided
for by law;

Third, those whom the President may be authorized by law to appoint;

Fourth, officers lower in rank whose appointments the Congress may by law vest in the
President alone.
Petition for prohibition DISMISSED because following the rules of constitutional construction, only
the first group requires the confirmation/consent of Commission on Appointments. The other
groups do not expressly state the need for the confirmation of the Commission on Appointments
for a valid appointment into office. It is also important to note that when the 1987 Constitution was
made, the framers looked through previous Constitutions (1935 &1973) and saw that in 1935
required the confirmation of Commission on Appointments for all appointments made by the
President. On the other hand, 1973 Constitution gave all the power to the President, he did not
need to confer with anyone when he appointed people. These opposite sides of the spectrum
brought about consequences so in the 1987 Constitution, they wanted to strike a middle ground
on the matter so they framed Sec 16 of Article VII as such. There are some appointments that
MUST have the confirmation of the Commission on Appointments and there are some
appointments that do not need confirmation and are validly done by the President. In this case,
appointment of Sarmiento as Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs does not fall under the first
group so he was validly put into place and should get salary for his work.