CHAPTER 6
ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUDICATION AND PROCEDURE
The 1987 Code of 1987, Book VII on administrative procedure, simply defines
adjudication as “an agency process for the formulation of final order.”
“Adjudicate,” commonly or popularly understood, means to adjudge, arbitrate, judge,
decide, determinate, resolve, rule on, settle. The dictionary defines the term as “to settle finally
(the rights and duties of the parties to a court case) on the merits of issues raised: to pass
judgment on; to settle judicially. In the legal sense, “adjudicate” means, to settle in the exercise
of judicial authority.
Compromise and Arbitration
To expedite administrative proceedings involving conflicting rights or claims and obviate
expensive litigations, every agency shall, in the public interest, encourage amicable settlement,
compromise and arbitration.
Administrative Due Process
In the landmark case of Ang Tibay v. CIR, the following are the cardinal rights to be observed
in administrative proceedings:
1. Right to a hearing;
2. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented;
3. The decision must be supported by evidence;
4. The evidence must be substantial;
5. The decision must be rendered on the evidence presented at the hearing, or at least
contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected;
6. The body (CIR) or any of its judges, must act on his own independent consideration of
the law and facts of the controversy, and not simply accept the views of a subordinate in
arriving at a decision;
and
7. Decide in such manner that the parties to the proceeding can know the various issues
involved and the reasons for the decision rendered.
Administrative proceedings are not exempt from the operation of certain basic and
fundamental procedure principles, such as the due process requirements in investigations and
trials. Administrative due process includes:
a. The right to actual or constructive notice of the institution of proceedings which may
affect a person’s legal rights;
b. Reasonable opportunity to appear and defend his rights, introduce witnesses and
relevant evidence in his favor;
c. A tribunal so constituted as to give him reasonable assurance of honesty and
impartiality, and one of competent jurisdiction;
d. A finding or decision by that tribunal supported by substantial evidence presented at
the hearing, or at least contained in the records or disclosed to the parties affected.
It is basic to due process that the tribunal considering the administrative question be
impartial, to ensure a fair decision. Due process of law means fundamental fairness.
Notice and Hearing in Contested Cases
Note the twin-rule in due process: NOTICE AND HEARING
The essence of due process in administrative proceedings is the opportunity to explain
one’s side or a chance to seek reconsideration of the action or ruling complained of. Denial of
the right to notice and hearing will render the administrative proceedings null and void for
denial of due process. Nevertheless, it is not correct to say that this right is indispensable, for
there are some instances when it can validly be omitted. Among the justifications for such
omission are the urgency of immediate action, the tentativeness of the administrative action
and the fact that the right has previously been offered but not claimed.
In any contested case, all parties shall be entitled to notice and hearing. The notice shall
be served at least 5 days before the date of hearing and shall state the date, time and place of
the hearing. The parties shall be given the opportunity to present evidence and argument on all
issues. If not precluded by law, informal disposition may be made of any contested case by
stipulation, agreed settlement or default. the agency shall keep an official record of its
proceedings.
The opportunity to adduce evidence is essential in the administrative process, as
decisions must be rendered on the evidence presented, either in the hearing, or at least
contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected.
TRIAL TYPE HEARING NOT REQUIRED
Due process does not necessarily mean or require a hearing. When discretion is
exercised by an officer vested with it upon an undisputed fact, such as the filing of a serious
criminal charge against a passport holder, hearing may be dispensed with by such officer as a
pre-requisite to the cancellation of the holder’s passport. The lack of such hearing does not
violate due process clause of the Constitution and the exercise of the exercise of the discretion
vested in the officer cannot be deemed whimsical and capricious because of the absence of
such hearing.
A trial type proceeding can be essential though where the findings are necessarily to be
based on the credibility of the witnesses or of the complainants.
DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS
There was a denial of due process when the investigating attorney:
1. Proceeded with the hearing without first acting on the motion to dismiss;
2. Ruled that the respondent’s attempt to reserve his right to cross examine was a waiver
of such right;
3. Conducted an ocular inspection motu proprio and interrogated witnesses during the
same;
4. Called to the witness stand a person who was not a witness for either complainants or
the respondents, and asked him questions to which he refused to entertain any
objection from counsel;
5. Arbitrarily refused the presentation of a witness on the ground his testimony was merely
corroborative, although as it later turned out that the testimony was material to the
defense;
6. Terminated the hearing without giving respondent full opportunity to present his other
witnesses.
“The Court approved Webster’s definition of procedural due process thus: ‘ By law of the
land is more clearly intended the general law, a law which hears before it condemns, which
hears upon inquiry and renders judgment only upon trial.’ This court in a 1924 decision after
quoting the above, added that procedural due process contemplates ‘notice and opportunity to
be heard before judgment is rendered, affecting person and property.’”
RULES OF EVIDENCE
“In administrative law, a quasi-judicial proceeding involves:
a. Taking and evaluation of evidence;
b. Determining facts based on the evidence presented
c. Rendering an order or decision supported by the facts proved.
The opportunity to adduce evidence is essential in the administrative process, as
decisions must be rendered on the evidence presented, either in the hearing, or at least
contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected. Indeed, “notice and hearing are
the bulwarks of administrative due process, the right to which is among the primary rights that
must be respected even in administrative proceedings.”
In administrative proceedings, the quantum of proof necessary for a finding of guilt is
only substantial evidence. Again, substantial evidence means such evidence relevant as a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. It means evidence which
affords a substantial basis from which the fact in issue can be reasonably inferred.”
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS AND REVIEW
Unless otherwise provided by law or executive order, an appeal from a final decision of
the administrative agency may be taken to the Department Head, whose decision may further
be brought to the regular courts of justice, in accordance with the procedure specified by law.
