While Congress was in session, the President

appointed eight acting Secretaries. A group

of Senators from the minority bloc questioned
the validity of the appointments in a petition
before the Supreme Court on the ground that
while Congress is in session, no appointment
that requires confirmation by the Commission
on Appointments, can be made without the
latter's consent, and that an undersecretary
should instead be designated as Acting
Secretary. Should the petition be granted? (5%)

Confirmation by the CA is required only

for presidential appointees as mentioned in
the first sentence of Sec. 16, Art. VII,
including, those officers whose appointments
are expressly vested by the Constitution
itself in the president (like sectoral
representatives to Congress and members
of the constitutional commissions of Audit,
Civil Service and Election).

(a) Heads of the executive departments

(b) Ambassadors, other public ministers
and consuls
(c) Officers of the Armed Forces of the
Philippines with the rank of
colonel or naval captain (because these
are officers of a sizeable
command enough to stage a coup)
(d) Other officers whose appointments are vested
in the President
in the Constitution:
(i) Chairman and Commissioners of the Constitutional
Commissions (Sec 1 Art IX-B, Sec 1 (2) Art IX-B, Sec 1(2) Art Ix-
D)
(ii) Regular members of the Judicial and Bar Council
(Sec 8 (2) Art VII)
(iii) Sectoral representatives (Sec 7 Art XVIII, Sec 18 Art X)

Confirmation is not required when the President appoints other

government officers whose appointments are not otherwise
provided for by law or those officers whom he may be authorized
by law to appoint (like the Chairman and Members of the Com. on
Human Rights). Also, as observed in Sarmiento v. Mison, when
Congress creates inferior offices but omits to provide for
appointment thereto, or provides in an unconstitutional manner for
such appointments, the officers are considered as among those
whose appointments are not otherwise provided for by law.