Scribd
Upload
48 views2 pages

Understanding Administrative Due Process

Administrative due process requires certain procedures and standards be followed in administrative tribunals and disciplinary proceedings. Specifically, it requires that (1) prior to imposing sanctions, the disciplining authority must make an independent assessment of the facts and law; (2) the decision must show the bases for its conclusions so respondents are informed and can appeal; and (3) the accused has the right to be informed of the accusations against them and have an opportunity to defend themselves. Administrative due process also requires findings and decisions be supported by substantial evidence, the tribunal acts independently in considering the law and facts, and controversial questions are decided in a manner that shows the issues and reasons to the parties.

Uploaded by

Edralino Eugenio Nicolas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
48 views2 pages

Understanding Administrative Due Process

Administrative due process requires certain procedures and standards be followed in administrative tribunals and disciplinary proceedings. Specifically, it requires that (1) prior to imposing sanctions, the disciplining authority must make an independent assessment of the facts and law; (2) the decision must show the bases for its conclusions so respondents are informed and can appeal; and (3) the accused has the right to be informed of the accusations against them and have an opportunity to defend themselves. Administrative due process also requires findings and decisions be supported by substantial evidence, the tribunal acts independently in considering the law and facts, and controversial questions are decided in a manner that shows the issues and reasons to the parties.

Uploaded by

Edralino Eugenio Nicolas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Administrative due process 1

Administrative due process

9
The standard of due process that must be met in administrative tribunals allows a certain degree of
latitude as long as fairness is not ignored.17 17 Adamson & Adamson, Inc. v. Amores, et al., G.R. No. L-
58292, 23 July 1987, 152 SCRA 237.

Administrative tribunals exercising quasi-judicial powers are unfettered by the rigidity of certain procedural
requirements, subject to the observance of fundamental and essential requirements of due process in
justiciable cases presented before them.9 9 De los Santos v. NLRC, et al., 423 Phil. 1020 (2001)

Administrative due process requires that, prior to imposing disciplinary sanctions, the
disciplining authority must make an independent assessment of the facts and the law. On its
face, a decision imposing administrative sanctions must show the bases for its conclusions.
While the investigation of a case may be delegated to and conducted by another body or
group of officials, the disciplining authority must nevertheless weigh the evidence gathered
and indicate the applicable law. In this manner, the respondents would be informed of the
bases for the sanctions and thus be able to prepare their appeal intelligently. Such
procedure is part of the sporting idea of fair play in a democracy. 496 Phil. 886EN
BANC[ G.R. NO. 157684. April 27, 2005 ]DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, PETITIONER, VS.
PRISCILLA G. CAMPOSANO, ENRIQUE L. PEREZ, AND IMELDA Q. AGUSTIN, RESPONDENTS.
In observing administrative due process, it is essential that the accused be accorded the
right to be informed of the accusations against him or her. Fair play requires that the
accused be equipped with the necessary information for the preparation of his or her
defense. THIRD DIVISION[ G.R. No. 180745. August 30, 2017 ]ALBERTA DE JOYA IGLESIAS,
PETITIONER, VS. THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, GEORGE M. JEREOS, ROBERTO G.
GEOTINA, JUAN T. TAN, KRISTINE MORALES, AND ALBERTO LINA, RESPONDENTS.
n F/O Ledesma v. Court of Appeals:[108]

Due process is satisfied when a person is notified of the charge against him and given an
opportunity to explain or defend himself. In administrative proceedings, the filing of charges
and giving reasonable opportunity for the person so charged to answer the accusations against
him constitute the minimum requirements of due process. The essence of due process is
simply to be heard, or as applied to administrative proceedings, an opportunity to explain
one's side, or an opportunity to seek a reconsideration of the action or ruling complained of.
[109]

An important component of due process is the right of the accused to be informed of the
nature of the charges against him or her.[110] A proper appraisal of the accusations would give
the accused an opportunity to adequately prepare for his or her defense. Otherwise,
substantial justice would be undermined.[111] [108] 565 Phil. 731 (2007) [Per J. Tinga, Second
Division].[109] Id. at 740.[110] Sajonas v. National Labor Relations Commission (First Div.), 262
Phil. 201, 208 (1990) [Per J. Regalado, Second Division]. [111] See Col. Lubaton v. Judge Lazaro,
717 Phil. 1, 6 (2013) [Per J. Bersamin, First Division].
Administrative due process 2
We stress that administrative due process also requires the following: 1) A finding or
decision by a competent tribunal that is supported by substantial evidence, either
presented at the hearing or at least contained in the records or disclosed to the parties
affected; 2) The tribunal must act on its own independent consideration of the law and facts
of the controversy and not simply accept the view of a subordinate in arriving at a
decision; and 3) The tribunal should in all controversial questions, render its decision in such
a manner that the parties to the proceeding can know the various issues involved and the
reason for the decision rendered.[45] [45] See Air Manila, Inc. v. Hon. Balatbat, et al., 148 Phil.
502 (1971); Garcia v. Executive Secretary, 116 Phil. 344 (1962); Ang Tibay v. Court of
Industrial Relations, 69 Phil. 635, 642-644 (1940).

You might also like