Professional Documents
Culture Documents
*
G.R. No. 83896. Frbeuary 22, 1991.
_______________
* EN BANC.
318
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017874c32c9a52f9746b003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/20
3/28/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 194
the light of the history of the times, and the condition and
circumstances under which the Constitution was framed. The
object is to ascertain the reason which induced the framers of the
Constitution to enact the particular provision and the purpose
sought to be accomplished thereby, in order to construe the whole
as to make the words consonant to that reason and calculated to
effect that purpose.
Same; Same; Same; Same; The intent of the framers of the
Constitution was to impose a stricter prohibition on the President
and his official family in so far as holding other offices or
employment in the government or elsewhere is concerned.—
Evidently, from this move as well as in the different phraseologies
of the constitutional provisions in question, the intent of the
framers of the Constitution was to impose a stricter prohibition on
the President and his official family in so far as holding other
offices or employment in the government or elsewhere is
concerned.
Same; Same; Same; Same; Such intent is underscored by a
comparison of Section 13, Article VII when other provisions of the
Constitution on the disqualifications of certain public officials or
employees from holding other offices or employment.—Moreover,
such intent is underscored by a comparison of Section 13, Article
VII with other provisions of the Constitution on the
disqualifications of certain public officials or employees from
holding other offices or employment. Under Section 13, Article VI,
“(N)o Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may
hold any other office or employment in the Government . . .”.
Under Section 5(4), Article XVI, “(N)o member of the armed forces
in the active service shall, at any time, be appointed in any
capacity to a civilian position in the Government, including
government-owned or controlled corporations or any of their
subsidiaries.” Even Section 7 (2), Article IX-B, relied upon by
respondents provides “(U)nless otherwise allowed by law or by the
primary functions of his position, no appointive official shall hold
any other office or employment in the Government.”
Same; Same; Same; Same; The prohibition imposed on the
President and his official family is therefore all-embracing and
covers both public and private office or employment.—It is quite
notable that in all these provisions on disqualifications to hold
other office or employment, the prohibition pertains to an office or
employment in the government and government-owned or
controlled corporations or their subsidiaries. In striking contrast
is the wording of Section 13, Article VII which states that “(T)he
President, Vice-President, the Members
319
320
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017874c32c9a52f9746b003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/20
3/28/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 194
FERNAN, C.J.:
321
1
August 9, 1988 and are being resolved jointly as both seek
a declaration of the unconstitutionality of Executive Order
No. 284 issued by President Corazon C. Aquino on July 25,
1987. The pertinent provisions of the assailed Executive
Order are:
_______________
1 P. 71, Rollo in G.R. No. 83815 and p. 28, Rollo in G.R. No. 83896.
2 Italics supplied.
322
_______________
323
“Sec. 7. xxx xxx xxx
“Unless otherwise allowed by law or by the primary functions of
his position, no appointive official shall hold any other office or
employment in the government or any subdivision, agency or
instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled
corporations or their subsidiaries.”
_______________
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017874c32c9a52f9746b003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/20
3/28/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 194
324
325
_______________
11 Maxwell vs. Dow, 176 U.S. 581, 20 Sup. Ct. 448,44 L. Ed. 597.
326
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017874c32c9a52f9746b003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 8/20
3/28/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 194
_______________
12 R.B. No. 95, Monday, March 11, 1985, Record of the Batasan, Volume
IV, pp. 835-836.
327
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017874c32c9a52f9746b003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 9/20
3/28/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 194
_______________
13 pp. 11-14.
328
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017874c32c9a52f9746b003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 10/20
3/28/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 194
_______________
330
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017874c32c9a52f9746b003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 11/20
3/28/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 194
_______________
15 Sec. 3, Ibid.
16 Sec. 7, Article VII.
17 Old Wayne Mut. Life Asso. vs. McDonough, 204 U.S. 8, 51 L Ed 345,
27 S Ct 236; Wallace vs. Payne, 197 Cal 539, 241 P. 879.
18 Grantz vs. Grauman (Ky) 320 SW 2d 364; Runyon vs. Smith,
331
_______________
332
_______________
333
26
be avoided.
To reiterate, the prohibition under Section 13, Article
VII is not to be interpreted as covering positions held
without additional compensation in ex-officio capacities as
provided by law and as required by the primary functions
of the concerned official’s office. The term ex-officio means
“from office; by virtue of office.” It refers to an “authority
derived from official character merely, not expressly
conferred upon the individual character, but rather
annexed to the official position.” Ex-officio likewise denotes
an “act done in an official character, or as a consequence of
office, and without any other appointment
27
or authority
than that conferred by the office.” An ex-officio member of
a board is one who is a member by virtue of his title to a
certain office,28
and without further warrant or
appointment. To illustrate, by express provision of law,
the Secretary of Transportation and Communications is the
ex-officio Chairman
29
of the Board of the Philippine 30
Ports
Authority, and the Light Rail Transit Authority.
The Court had occasion to explain the meaning of an ex-
officio position in Rafael vs. Embroidery and Apparel
Control and Inspection Board,31 thus: “An examination of
section 2 of the questioned statute (R.A. 3137) reveals that
for the chairman and members of the Board to qualify they
need only be designated by the respective department
heads. With the exception of the representative from the
private sector, they sit ex-officio. In order to be designated
they must already be holding positions in the offices
mentioned in the law. Thus, for instance, one who does not
hold a previous appointment in the Bureau of Customs,
cannot, under the act, be designated a representative from
that office. The same is true with respect to the represen-
_______________
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017874c32c9a52f9746b003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 14/20
3/28/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 194
26 Hirabayashi vs. United States, 320 U.S. 81, 87 L.Ed. 1774, 63 S. Ct.
1375; Opp Cotton Mills, Inc. vs. Administrator of Wage and Hour Div., 312
U.S. 126,85 L. Ed. 624,61 S. Ct. 524; Gage vs. Jordan, 23 Cal 2d 794, 174
P 2d, 287 cited in 16 Am Jur 2d, pp. 100, 464.
27 Black’s Law Dictionary, p. 516; 15A Words and Phrases, p. 392.
28 15A Words and Phrases, p. 392.
29 Sec. 7, E.O. 778.
30 Sec. 1, E.O. 210.
31 21 SCRA 336 (1967).
334
_______________
32 Italics supplied.
33 33A Words and Phrases, p. 210, citing Collector of Revenue vs.
Louisiana Ready Mix Co., La. App., 197 S. 2d 141, 145.
34 Sec. 7, P.D. No. 474.
335
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017874c32c9a52f9746b003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 15/20
3/28/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 194
_______________
336
_______________
337
_______________
338
44
adopting it than in the framers’s understanding thereof.
It being clear, as it was in fact one of its best selling
points, that the 1987 Constitution seeks to prohibit the
President, Vice-President, members of the Cabinet, their
deputies or assistants from holding during their tenure
multiple offices or employment in the government, except
in those cases specified in the Constitution itself and as
above clarified with respect to posts held without
additional compensation in an ex-officio capacity as
provided by law and as required by the primary functions
of their office, the citation of Cabinet members (then called
Minis-ters) as examples during the debate and deliberation
on the general rule laid down for all appointive officials
should be considered as mere personal opinions which
cannot override the constitution’s manifest intent and the
people’ understanding thereof.
In the light of the construction given to Section 13,
Article VII in relation to Section 7, par. (2), Article IX-B of
the 1987 Constitution, Executive Order No. 284 dated July
23, 1987 is unconstitutional. Ostensibly restricting the
number of positions that Cabinet members,
undersecretaries or assistant sec-retaries may hold in
addition to their primary position to not more than two (2)
positions in the government and government corporations,
Executive Order No. 284 actually allows them to hold
multiple offices or employment in direct contravention of
the express mandate of Section 13, Article VII of the 1987
Constitution prohibiting them from doing so, unless
otherwise provided in the 1987 Constitution itself.
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017874c32c9a52f9746b003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 18/20
3/28/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 194
_______________
339
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017874c32c9a52f9746b003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 19/20
3/28/2021 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 194
_______________
340
Petitions granted.
——o0o——
_______________
341
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017874c32c9a52f9746b003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 20/20