Topic: Commission on Appointments

CUNANAN V. TAN
5/10/1962

G.R. No. L-19721             May 10, 1962

CARLOS CUNANAN, petitioner,
vs.
JORGE TAN, JR., respondents.

PER CURIAM:

FACTS:
Petitioner Carlos Cunanan — who claims to be a career employee, with more than thirty (30) years in the
government service – was, on June 6 or 8, 1961, appointed by the President of the Philippines as acting Deputy
Administrator of the Reforestation Administration, Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Thereupon, he
qualified and assumed the duties and functions of said office.
On November 6, 1961, the President extended to him an ad interim appointment as Deputy Administrator of the
Reforestation Administration, Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources.
On April 3, 1962, six (6) Senators and seven (7) members of the House of Representatives, purporting to act as
the Commission on Appointments, rejected said ad interim appointment.
On April 11, 1962, respondent Jorge Tan, Jr. was designated by the President as Acting Deputy Administrator of
the Reforestation Administration, Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources, and performed the function of said
office, without the consent of petitioner herein.
Hence, soon thereafter, or on April 27, 1962, petitioner commenced the present quo warranto proceeding against
respondent, contending that the latter's designation is invalid, the office of Deputy Administrator of the Reforestation
Administration, Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources, not being vacant when he was designated thereto.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the rejection of petitioner's ad interim appointment by the aforementioned thirteen (13) members
of Congress, purporting to act as the Commission on Appointments is valid.

RULING:
No!
The determination of this issue depends upon: (1) the legality of the resolution of the House of Representatives of
March 21, 1962, declaring the seats of its twelve (12) members in the Commission on Appointments vacant; and (2) the
legality of the action of the House of Representatives in reconstituting the membership of the Commission on
Appointments for said House. In view of the conclusion we have reached with respect to the first question, we deem it
unnecessary to pass upon the second question.
With respect to the first question, we hold that the same should be resolved in the negative. The Commission on
Appointments is a creature of the Constitution. Although its membership is confined to members of Congress, said
Commission is independent of Congress. The powers of the Commission do not come from Congress, but emanate
directly from the Constitution. Hence, it is not an agent of Congress. In fact, the functions of the Commissioner are purely
executive in nature. In order that the members of the Commission could properly discharge their duties as such, it is
essential that their tenure therein be provided with a certain measure of stability to insure the necessary freedom of
action.
If a House of Congress were free, at any time, to declare vacant the position of its members in the Commission on
Appointments, such House could, in effect, paralyze the entire Commission, without the consent of the other House. Such
possibility could not have been countenanced by the Constitutional Convention.
Without prejudice to an extended decision later on, the Court holds, therefore, that the resolution of the House of
Representatives of March 21, 1962, declining vacant the seats of the twelve (12) members of the House of
Representatives in the Commission on Appointments and appointing others in lieu of some of them, as well as the
rejection of the ad interim appointment of petitioner by thirteen (13) alleged members of the Commission on Appointments
as thus reorganized, and the designation of respondent Jorge Tan, Jr., as Acting Deputy Administrator of the
Reforestation Administration, Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources, on April 16, 1962, when said office was
not vacant, are null and void; that petitioner is entitled to hold said office; and that respondent should vacate the same
and turn it over to petitioner, with costs against said respondent.