109.

SALVADOR
Administrative; Quasi-Judicial Proceedings; Arbitration
Cruz v. CSC

Facts: The petitioners subsequently filed a Motion to Dismiss averring that if the
investigation will continue, they will be deprived of their right to due process because te
CSC was the complainant, the Prosecutor and the Judge, all at the same time.

Issue: Whether petitioner was denied due process by the CSC

Ruling: NO. The court ruled that there was no denial of due process since the
petitioners were formally charged after a finding that a prima facie case for dishonesty
lies against them and they were properly informed of the charges. They submitted an
Answer and were given the opportunity to defend themselves.

Main point: The CSC is mandated to hear and decide administrative cases instituted by
it or instituted before it directly or on appeal, including actions of its officers and the
agencies attached to it.

110. SALVADOR
Administrative; Quasi-Judicial Proceedings; Arbitration
Codilla v. De Venecia

Facts: The COMELEC ordered the exclusion of the votes cast in favor of the petitioner,
and the proclamation of the respondent Locsin, without affording the petitioner the
opportunity to challenge the same. Records reveal that the petitioner received notice of
the Resolution of the COMELEC only through his counsel via facsimile message.

Issue: Whether the disqualification of the petitioner is binding

Ruling: NO. The court ruled that it was null and void since the petitioner was deprived
of due process.

Main point: The essence of due process is the opportunity to be heard. When a party is
deprived of that basic fairness, any decision by any tribunal in prejudice of his rights is
void.

111. SALVADOR
Administrative; Quasi-Judicial Proceedings; Arbitration
Associated Communication v. Dumlao

Facts: ACWS argues that NTC failed to observe due process in the issuance of the
Order because ACWS did not receive the letter mentioned in the Order. ACWS likewise
assails the directive to cease and desist from operating Channel 25 --wherein ACWS is
referring to the procedural aspect of the due process clause. The NTC afforded ACWS
an opportunity to be heard by requiring it to submit an answer and by conducting
hearings on the matter.

Issue: Whether ACWS (petitioner) was deprived of due process

Ruling: NO. The court ruled that as long as the party was given the opportunity to
defend his interest in due course, he cannot be said to have been denied due process
of law. In order to fall within the protection of this provision, two conditions must concur,
namely, that there is deprivation and that such deprivation is done without proper
observance of due process.

Main point: When on speaks of due process of law, a distinction must be made
between matters of procedure and matters of substance. Procedural due process refers
to the method or manner by which law is enforced; substantive due process requires
that the law itself, not merely the procedures by which the law would be enforced, is fair,
reasonable, and just.