Case Digests 14

8/13/2019 Case Digests 14

1/102

Name: Jabe Tecson Gica

August 7, 2013 WednesdayTITLE : SOLIVEN VS. MAKASIAR

ITATI!N: 1"7 # $A 3%3&ATE: N!'E()E$ 1*, 1%++

A T#:

Subsequent events have rendered the first issue moot and academic. On March 30,

1988, the Secretary of Justice denied etitioners! motion for reconsideration and

u he"d the reso"ution of the #ndersecretary of Justice sustainin$ the %ity &isca"!s

findin$ of a rima facie case a$ainst etitioners. ' second motion for

reconsideration fi"ed by etitioner (e"tran )as denied by the Secretary of Justice on

' ri" *, 1988. On a ea", the +resident, throu$h the -ecutive Secretary, affirmed

the reso"ution of the Secretary of Justice on May , 1988. /he motion for

reconsideration )as denied by the -ecutive Secretary on May 1 , 1988. ith these

deve"o ments, etitioners! contention that they have been denied the

administrative remedies avai"ab"e under the "a) has "ost factua" su ort.

(e"tran is amon$ the etitioners in this case. 2e to$ether )ith others )as char$ed

for "ibe" by the resident. %ory herse"f fi"ed a com "aint affidavit a$ainst him and

others. Ma4asiar averred that %ory cannot fi"e a com "aint affidavit because this

)ou"d defeat her immunity from suit. 2e $rounded his contention on the rinci "e

that a resident cannot be sued. 2o)ever, if a resident )ou"d sue then the

resident )ou"d a""o) herse"f to be "aced under the court5s 6urisdiction and

converse"y she )ou"d be consentin$ to be sued bac4. '"so, considerin$ the

functions of a resident, the resident may not be ab"e to a ear in court to be a)itness for herse"f thus she may be "iab"e for contem t.

I##-E:

hether or not the +resident of the +hi"i ines, under the %onstitution, may

initiate crimina" roceedin$s a$ainst the etitioners throu$h the fi"in$ of a

com "aint affidavit7

T.E !-$T/# $-LING:

/he rationa"e for the $rant to the +resident of the rivi"e$e of immunity from suit is

to assure the e-ercise of +residentia" duties and functions free from any hindrance

or distraction, considerin$ that bein$ the %hief -ecutive of the overnment is a 6ob

that, aside from requirin$ a"" of the office ho"der5s time, a"so demands undivided


2/102

attention. (ut this rivi"e$e of immunity from suit ertains to the +resident by virtue

of the office and may be invo4ed on"y by the ho"der of the office not by any other

erson in the +resident5s beha"f. /hus, an accused "i4e (e"tran et a", in a crimina"

case in )hich the +resident is com "ainant cannot raise the residentia" rivi"e$e as

a defense to revent the case from roceedin$ a$ainst such accused.

Moreover, there is nothin$ in our "a)s that )ou"d revent the +resident from

)aivin$ the rivi"e$e. /hus, if so minded the +resident may shed the rotection

afforded by the rivi"e$e and submit to the court5s 6urisdiction. /he choice of

)hether to e-ercise the rivi"e$e or to )aive it is so"e"y the +resident5s rero$ative.

:t is a decision that cannot be assumed and im osed by any other erson.

's to etitioner (e"tran!s c"aim that to a""o) the "ibe" case to roceed )ou"d roduce

a ;chi""in$ effect; on ress freedom, the %ourt finds no basis at this sta$e to ru"e on

the oint. /he etitions fai" to estab"ish that ub"ic res ondents, throu$h their

se arate acts, $rave"y abused their discretion as to amount to "ac4 of 6urisdiction.

2ence, the )rits of certiorari and rohibition rayed for cannot issue.

&indin$ no $rave abuse of discretion amountin$ to e-cess or "ac4 of 6urisdiction on

the art of the ub"ic res ondents, the court dismissed the etitions.


3/102

TITLE : ESTRADA VS. DESIERTO

ITATI!N: G $ N! 1*"710 1&ATE: (A$ . 2, 2001

A T#:

:n the May 11, 1998 e"ections, etitioner Jose h strada )as e"ected +resident )hi"e

res ondent "oria Maca a$a" 'rroyo )as e"ected Vice +resident. &rom the

be$innin$ of his term, ho)ever, etitioner )as "a$ued by rob"ems that s"o)"y

eroded his o u"arity. On October re resentatives or more than 1?3 of a"" the members of

the 2ouse of @e resentatives to the Senate. On =ovember 0, 000, the Senate

forma""y o ened the im eachment tria" of the etitioner. On January 1 , 001, by a

vote of 11 10, the senator 6ud$es ru"ed a$ainst the o enin$ of the second enve"o e)hich a""e$ed"y contained evidence sho)in$ that etitioner he"d +3.3 bi""ion in a

secret ban4 account under the name AJose Ve"arde.B

/he ru"in$ )as met by a s ontaneous outburst of an$er that hit the streets of the

metro o"is. /hereafter, the 'rmed &orces and the +=+ )ithdre) their su ort to the

strada $overnment. Some %abinet secretaries, undersecretaries, assistant

secretaries and bureau chiefs resi$ned from their osts.

On January 0, 001, at about 1 noon, %hief Justice Cavide administered the oathto res ondent 'rroyo as +resident of the +hi"i ines. On the same day, etitioner

issued a ress statement that he )as "eavin$ Ma"acanan$ +a"ace for the sa4e of

eace and in order to be$in the hea"in$ rocess of the nation. :t a"so a eared that

on the same day, he si$ned a "etter statin$ that he )as transmittin$ a dec"aration

that he )as unab"e to e-ercise the o)ers and duties of his office and that by


4/102

o eration of "a) and the %onstitution, the Vice +resident sha"" be the 'ctin$

+resident. ' co y of the "etter )as sent to S ea4er &uentebe""a and Senate

+resident +imente" on the same day.

'fter his fa"" from the o)er, the etitioner5s "e$a" rob"ems a eared in c"usters.

Severa" cases revious"y fi"ed a$ainst him in the Office of the Ombudsman )ere set

in motion.

I##-E#:

hether or not the etitioner resi$ned as +resident7

hether or not the etitioner is on"y tem orari"y unab"e to act as +resident7

T.E !-$T/# $-LING:

/he etitioner denies he resi$ned as +resident or that he suffers from a ermanent

disabi"ity. @esi$nation is a factua" question. :n order to have a va"id resi$nation,

there must be an intent to resi$n and the intent must be cou "ed by acts ofre"inquishment. /he va"idity of a resi$nation is not $overned by any forma"

requirement as to form. :t can be ora". :t can be )ritten. :t can be e- ress. :t can be

im "ied. 's "on$ as the resi$nation is c"ear, it must be $iven "e$a" effect. :n the

cases at bar, the facts sho) that etitioner did not )rite any forma" "etter of

resi$nation before "eavin$ Ma"acanan$ +a"ace.

%onsequent"y, )hether or not etitioner resi$ned has to be determined from his

acts and omissions before, durin$ and after Jan. 0, 001 or by the tota"ity of rior,contem oraneous and osterior facts and circumstantia" evidence bearin$ a

materia" re"evance on the issue. /he %ourt had an authoritative )indo) on the state

of mind of the etitioner rovided by the diary of -ecutive Sec. 'n$ara seria"iDed in

the +hi". Cai"y :nquirer. Curin$ the first sta$e of ne$otiation bet)een strada and

the o osition, the to ic )as a"ready about a eacefu" and order"y transfer of

o)er. /he resi$nation of the etitioner )as im "ied. Curin$ the second round of

ne$otiation, the resi$nation of the etitioner )as a$ain treated as a $iven fact. /he

on"y unsett"ed oints at that time )ere the measures to be underta4en by thearties durin$ and after the transition eriod.

/he %ourt he"d that the resi$nation of the etitioner cannot be doubted. :t )as

confirmed by his "eavin$ Ma"acanan$. :n the ress re"ease containin$ his fina"

statement, E1F he ac4no)"ed$ed the oath ta4in$ of the res ondent as +resident of


5/102

the @e ub"ic, but )ith the reservation about its "e$a"ity E F he em hasiDed he )as

"eavin$ the +a"ace, the seat of the residency, for the sa4e of eace and in order to

be$in the hea"in$ rocess of the nation. 2e did not say he )as "eavin$ the +a"ace

due to any 4ind of inabi"ity and that he )as $oin$ to reassume the residency as

soon as the disabi"ity disa ears E3F he e- ressed his $ratitude to the eo "e forthe o ortunity to serve them EF he

ca""ed on his su orters to 6oin him in the romotion of a constructive nationa" s irit

of reconci"iation and so"idarity. /he %ourt a"so tac4"ed the contention of the

etitioner that he is mere"y tem orari"y unab"e to erform the o)ers and duties of

the residency, and hence is a +resident on "eave. /he inabi"ity c"aim is contained in

the Jan. 0, 001 "etter of etitioner sent to Senate +res. +imente" and S ea4er

&uentebe""a. Ces ite said "etter, the 2ouse of @e resentatives assed a reso"ution

su ortin$ the assum tion into office by 'rroyo as +resident. /he Senate a"so

assed a reso"ution confirmin$ the nomination of uin$ona as Vice +resident. (oth

houses of %on$ress have reco$niDed res ondent 'rroyo as the +resident. :m "icit"y

c"ear in that reco$nition is the remise that the inabi"ity of etitioner strada is no

"on$er tem orary. %on$ress has c"ear"y re6ected etitioner5s c"aim of inabi"ity. /he

%ourt cannot ass u on etitioner5s c"aim of inabi"ity to dischar$e the o)ers and

duties of the residency. /he question is o"itica" in nature and addressed so"e"y to

%on$ress by constitutiona" fiat. :t is a o"itica" issue )hich cannot be decided by the

%ourt )ithout trans$ressin$ the rinci "e of se aration of o)ers.

TITLE : ALMONTE VS. VASQUEZ

ITATI!N: G $ N! % 3"7

&ATE: (A 23, 1%%A T#:

@es ondent, Ombudsman, requires etitioners =erio @o$ado and "isa @ivera, as

chief accountant and record custodian, res ective"y, of the conomic :nte""i$ence

and :nvesti$ation (ureau E ::(F to roduce ;a"" documents re"atin$ to +ersona"

Services &unds for the year 1988; and a"" evidence such as vouchers from enforcin$

his orders. +etitioner '"monte )as former"y %ommissioner of the ::(, )hi"e +ereD is

%hief of the ::(!s (ud$et and &isca" Mana$ement Civision.

/he sub oena duces tecum )as issued by the Ombudsman in connection )ith his

investi$ation of an anonymous "etter a""e$in$ that funds re resentin$ savin$s from

unfi""ed ositions in the ::( had been i""e$a""y disbursed. /he "etter, ur ortin$ to

have been )ritten by an em "oyee of the ::( and a concerned citiDen, )as


6/102

addressed to the Secretary of &inance, )ith co ies furnished severa" $overnment

offices, inc"udin$ the Office of the Ombudsman.

/he "etter reads in ertinent artsG that the EIIB has a syndicate headed by the

Chief of Budget Division who is manipulating funds and also the brain of the socalled "ghost agents" or the "Emergency Intelligence gents" !EI # that when the

agency had salary differential last $ct %&& all money for the whole plantilla were

released and from that alone' (illions were saved and converted to ghost agents of

EI # lmost all EIIB agents collects payroll from the big time smuggler syndicate

monthly and bro)ers every wee) for them not to be apprehended.

:n his comment on the "etter com "aint, etitioner '"monte denied a"" the

a""e$ations )ritten on the anonymous "etter. +etitioners moved to quash the

sub oena and the sub oena duces tecum but )ere denied. Cisc"osure of the

documents in question is resisted )ith the c"aim of rivi"e$e of an a$ency of the

$overnment on the $round that ;4no)"ed$e of ::(!s documents re"ative to its

+ersona" Services &unds and its "anti""a )i"" necessari"y "ead to 4no)"ed$e of its

o erations, movements, tar$ets, strate$ies, and tactics and the )ho"e of its bein$;

and this cou"d ;destroy the ::(.;

I##-E:

hether etitioners can be ordered to roduce documents re"atin$ to

ersona" services and sa"ary vouchers of ::( em "oyees on the "ea that

such documents are c"assified )ithout vio"atin$ their equa" rotection of

"a)s7

T.E !-$T/# $-LING:

't common "a) a $overnmenta" rivi"e$e a$ainst disc"osure is reco$niDed )ith

res ect to state secrets bearin$ on mi"itary, di "omatic and simi"ar matters and in

addition, rivi"e$e to )ithho"d the identity of ersons )ho furnish information of

vio"ation of "a)s. :n the case at bar, there is no c"aim that mi"itary or di "omaticsecrets )i"" be disc"osed by the roduction of records ertainin$ to the ersonne" of

the ::(. :ndeed, ::(!s function is the $atherin$ and eva"uation of inte""i$ence

re orts and information re$ardin$ ;i""e$a" activities affectin$ the nationa" economy,

such as, but not "imited to, economic sabota$e, smu$$"in$, ta- evasion, do""ar


7/102

sa"tin$.; %onsequent"y, )hi"e in cases )hich invo"ve state secrets it may be

sufficient to determine from the circumstances of the case that there is reasonab"e

dan$er that com u"sion of the evidence )i"" e- ose mi"itary matters )ithout

com e""in$ roduction no simi"ar e-cuse can be made for a rivi"e$e restin$ on

other considerations.

/he Ombudsman is investi$atin$ a com "aint that severa" items in the ::( )ere

fi""ed by fictitious ersons and that the a""otments for these items in 1988 )ere used

for i""e$a" ur oses. /he "anti""a and other ersonne" records are re"evant to his

investi$ation as the desi$nated A rotectors of the eo "eB of the %onstitution. =or is

there vio"ation of etitioners! ri$ht to the equa" rotection of the "a)s. +etitioners

com "ain that ;in a"" forum and tribuna"s. /he a$$rieved arties can on"y ha"e

res ondents via their verified com "aints or s)orn statements )ith their identities

fu""y disc"osed,; )hi"e in roceedin$s before the Office of the Ombudsman

anonymous "etters suffice to start an investi$ation.

:n the first "ace, there can be no ob6ection to this rocedure because it is rovided

in the %onstitution itse"f. :n the second "ace, it is a arent that in ermittin$ the

fi"in$ of com "aints ;in any form and in a manner,; the framers of the %onstitution

too4 into account the )e"" 4no)n reticence of the eo "e )hich 4ee them from

com "ainin$ a$ainst officia" )ron$doin$s. 's this %ourt had occasion to oint out,

the Office of the Ombudsman is different from the other investi$atory and

rosecutory a$encies of the $overnment because those sub6ect to its 6urisdiction

are ub"ic officia"s )ho, throu$h officia" ressure and inf"uence, can quash, de"ay or

dismiss investi$ations he"d a$ainst them. On the other hand com "ainants are more

often than not oor and sim "e fo"4 )ho cannot afford to hire "a)yers.

&ina""y, it is contended that the issuance of the sub oena duces tecum )ou"d vio"ate

etitioners! ri$ht a$ainst se"f incrimination. :t is enou$h to state that the documents

required to be roduced in this case are ub"ic records and those to )hom thesub oena duces tecum is directed are $overnment officia"s in )hose ossession or

custody the documents are. Moreover, if, as etitioners c"aim the disbursement by

the :: of funds for ersona" service has a"ready been c"eared by the %O', there is

no reason )hy they shou"d ob6ect to the e-amination of the documents by

res ondent Ombudsman.

TITLE : DOROMAL VS. SANDIGANBAYAN

ITATI!N: G $ N! + *"+&ATE: #E4TE()E$ 7, 1%+%


8/102

A T#:

+ettioner, Huintin S. Coroma", a former %ommissioner of the +residentia"

%ommission on ood overnment E+% F, for vio"ation of the 'nti raft and %orru t

+ractices 'ct E@' 3019F, Sec. 3EhF, in connection )ith his shareho"din$s and osition

as resident and director of the Coroma" :nternationa" /radin$ %or oration EC:/%F

)hich submitted bids to su "y + 1 mi""ion )orth of e"ectronic, e"ectrica",

automotive, mechanica" and air conditionin$ equi ment to the Ce artment of

ducation, %u"ture and S orts Eor C %SF and the =ationa" Man o)er and Iouth

%ounci" Eor =MI%F. :nformation )as then fi"ed by the A/anodbayanB a$ainst Coroma"

for the said vio"ation and a re"iminary investi$ation )as conducted.

/he etitioner then fi"ed a etition for certiorari and rohibition questionin$ the

6urisdiction of the A/anodbayanB to fi"e the information )ithout the a rova" of the

Ombudsman. /he Su reme %ourt he"d that the incumbent /anodbayan Eca""ed

S ecia" +rosecutor under the 198* %onstitution and )ho is su osed to retain

o)ers and duties =O/ :V = to the OmbudsmanF is c"ear"y )ithout authority to

conduct re"iminary investi$ations and to direct the fi"in$ of crimina" cases )ith the

Sandi$anbayan, e-ce t u on orders of the Ombudsman. Subsequent"y annu""in$ the

information fi"ed by the A/anodbayanB.

' ne) information, du"y a roved by the Ombudsman, )as fi"ed in theSandi$anbayan, a""e$in$ that the Coroma", a ub"ic officer, bein$ then a

%ommissioner of the +residentia" %ommission on ood overnment, did then and

there )i""fu""y and un"a)fu""y, artici ate in a business throu$h the Coroma"

:nternationa" /radin$ %or oration, a fami"y cor oration of )hich he is the +resident,

and )hich com any artici ated in the biddin$s conducted by the Ce artment of

ducation, %u"ture and S orts and the =ationa" Man o)er Iouth %ounci", )hich

act or artici ation is rohibited by "a) and the constitution. /he etitioner fi"ed a

motion to quash the information on the $round that it )as inva"id since there hadbeen no re"iminary investi$ation for the ne) information that )as fi"ed a$ainst

him.

/he motion )as denied by Sandi$anbayan c"aimin$ that another re"iminary

investi$ation is unnecessary because both o"d and ne) information invo"ve the

same sub6ect matter.

I##-E#:

hether or not the act of Coroma" )ou"d constitute a vio"ation of the

%onstitution7

hether or not re"iminary investi$ation is necessary even if both

informations invo"ve the same sub6ect matter7


9/102

hether or not the information sha"" be effected as inva"id due to the

absence of re"iminary investi$ation7

T.E !-$T/# $-LING:

/he resence of a si$ned document bearin$ the si$nature of Coroma" as art of the

a "ication to bid sho)s that he can ri$htfu""y be char$ed )ith havin$ artici ated

in a business )hich act is abso"ute"y rohibited by Section 13 of 'rtic"e V:: of the

%onstitution; because ;the C:/% remained a fami"y cor oration in )hich Coroma"has at "east an indirect interest.; #ection 13, A5tic6e 'II of the 198* %onstitution

rovides that ;the +resident, Vice +resident, the members of the %abinet and their

de uties or assistants sha"" not... durin$ EtheirF tenure, direct"y or indirect"y

artici ate in any business.

/he ri$ht of the accused to a re"iminary investi$ation is ;a substantia" one.; :ts

denia" over his o osition is a ; re6udicia" error, in that it sub6ects the accused to

the "oss of "ife, "iberty, or ro erty )ithout due rocess of "a); rovided by the

%onstitution. Since the first information )as annu""ed, the re"iminary investi$ation

conducted at that time sha"" a"so be considered as void. Cue to that fact, a ne)

re"iminary investi$ation must be conducted.

/he absence of re"iminary investi$ation does not affect the court!s 6urisdiction over

the case. =or do they im air the va"idity of the information or other)ise render it

defective but, if there )ere no re"iminary investi$ations and the defendants,

before enterin$ their "ea, invite the attention of the court to their absence, the

court, instead of dismissin$ the information shou"d conduct such investi$ation,order the fisca" to conduct it or remand the case to the inferior court so that the

re"iminary investi$ation may be conducted.

/he etition for certiorari and rohibition )as $ranted. /he Sandi$anbayan sha""

immediate"y remand %rimina" %ase =o. 1 893 to the Office of the Ombudsman for

re"iminary investi$ation and sha"" ho"d in abeyance the roceedin$s before it

endin$ the resu"t of such investi$ation.


10/102

TITLE : CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION VS. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

ITATI!N: 1%* # $A 317 G $ N! +3+%"&ATE: E)$-A$ 22, 1%%1

A T#:

/he etitioners, :$nacio +. Kacsina, Kuis @. Mauricio, 'ntonio @. Huintos and Juan /.Cavid for etitioners in 8389 and Juan /. Cavid for etitioners in 8381>. (oth

etitions )ere conso"idated and are bein$ reso"ved 6oint"y as both see4 a

dec"aration of unconstitutiona"ity of -ecutive Order =o. 8< issued by +resident

%oraDon %. 'quino. -ecutive Order =o. 8


11/102

hether or not -ecutive Order =o. 8< is unconstitutiona"7

hether or not the rohibition in Section 13, 'rtic"e V:: of the 198*

%onstitution insofar as %abinet members, their de uties or assistants are

concerned admit of the broad e-ce tions made for a ointive officia"s in$enera" under Section *, ar. E F, 'rtic"e : L(7

hether or not the rohibition a "ies to ositions he"d in e- officio ca acity7

hether or not the res ondents are ob"i$ed to reimburse the erquisites they

have received from the offices they have he"d ursuant to O 8


12/102

direct contravention of the e- ress mandate of Sec 13, 'rt * of the 198*

%onstitution rohibitin$ them from doin$ so, un"ess other)ise rovided in the 198*

%onstitution itse"f.

'"thou$h Section *, 'rtic"e : L( a"ready contains a b"an4et rohibition a$ainst theho"din$ of mu"ti "e offices or em "oyment in the $overnment subsumin$ both

e"ective and a ointive ub"ic officia"s, the %onstitutiona" %ommission shou"d see it

fit to formu"ate another rovision, Sec. 13, 'rtic"e V::, s ecifica""y rohibitin$ the

+resident, Vice +resident, members of the %abinet, their de uties and assistants

from ho"din$ any other office or em "oyment durin$ their tenure, un"ess other)ise

rovided in the %onstitution itse"f. hi"e a"" other a ointive officia"s in the civi"

service are a""o)ed to ho"d other office or em "oyment in the $overnment durin$

their tenure )hen such is a""o)ed by "a) or by the rimary functions of their

ositions, members of the %abinet, their de uties and assistants may do so on"y

)hen e- ress"y authoriDed by the %onstitution itse"f.

:n other )ords, Section *, 'rtic"e : L( is meant to "ay do)n the $enera" ru"e

a "icab"e to a"" e"ective and a ointive ub"ic officia"s and em "oyees, )hi"e

Section 13, 'rtic"e V:: is meant to be the e-ce tion a "icab"e on"y to the +resident,

the Vice +resident, Members of the %abinet, their de uties and assistants. /he

hrase Aun"ess other)ise rovided in this %onstitutionB must be $iven a "itera"

inter retation to refer on"y to those articu"ar instances cited in the %onstitution

itse"f, to )itG the Vice +resident bein$ a ointed as a member of the %abinet under

Section 3, ar. E F, 'rtic"e V:: or actin$ as +resident in those instances rovided

under Section *, ars. E F and E3F, 'rtic"e V:: and, the Secretary of Justice bein$ e-

officio member of the Judicia" and (ar %ounci" by virtue of Section 8 E1F, 'rtic"e V:::.

/he rohibition a$ainst ho"din$ dua" or mu"ti "e offices or em "oyment under

Section 13, 'rtic"e V:: of the %onstitution must not, ho)ever, be construed as

a "yin$ to osts occu ied by the -ecutive officia"s s ecified therein )ithout

additiona" com ensation in an e- officio ca acity as rovided by "a) and as

required by the rimary functions of said officia"s5 office. /he reason is that these

osts do no com rise Aany other officeB )ithin the contem "ation of the

constitutiona" rohibition but are ro er"y an im osition of additiona" duties and

functions on said officia"s. /he term e- officio means Afrom office by virtue of

office.B - officio "i4e)ise denotes an Aact done in an officia" character, or as a

consequence of office, and )ithout any other a ointment or authority than that


13/102

conferred by the office.B /he additiona" duties must not on"y be c"ose"y re"ated to,

but must be required by the officia"5s rimary functions. :f the functions required to

be erformed are mere"y incidenta", remote"y re"ated, inconsistent, incom atib"e, or

other)ise a"ien to the rimary function of a cabinet officia", such additiona"

functions )ou"d fa"" under the urvie) of Aany other officeB rohibited by the%onstitution.

Curin$ their tenure in the questioned ositions, res ondents may be considered de

facto officers and as such entit"ed to emo"uments for actua" services rendered. :t

has been he"d that Ain cases )here there is no de 6ure officer, a de facto officer,

)ho, in $ood faith has had ossession of the office and has dischar$ed the duties

ertainin$ thereto, is "e$a""y entit"ed to the emo"uments of the office, and may in an

a ro riate action recover the sa"ary, fees and other com ensations attached to

the office. 'ny er diem, a""o)ances or other emo"uments received by the

res ondents by virtue of actua" services rendered in the questioned ositions may

therefore be retained by them.

Overa"", -ecutive Order =o. 8< is unconstitutiona" as it actua""y a""o)s a member

of the cabinet, undersecretary or assistant secretary or other a ointive officia"s of

the -ecutive Ce artment to ho"d mu"ti "e offices or em "oyment in direct

contravention of the e- ress mandate of Section 13, 'rtic"e V:: of the 198*

%onstitution rohibitin$ them from doin$ so, un"ess other)ise rovided in the 198*

%onstitution itse"f.

TITLE : ESTRADA VS. ARROYO

ITATI!N: G $ N! 1*"73+&ATE: (A$ . 2, 2001

A T#:

+etitioner Jose h strada )as e"ected +resident in the May 1998 e"ections )hi"e

res ondent "oria Maca a$a" 'rroyo )as e"ected Vice +resident. &rom the

be$innin$ of his term, ho)ever, etitioner )as "a$ued by rob"ems that s"o)"y

eroded his o u"arity. On October re resentatives or more than 1?3 of a"" the

members of the 2ouse of @e resentatives to the Senate. On =ovember 0, 000,


14/102

the Senate forma""y o ened the im eachment tria" of the etitioner. On January 1 ,

001, by a vote of 11 10, the senator 6ud$es ru"ed a$ainst the o enin$ of the

second enve"o e )hich a""e$ed"y contained evidence sho)in$ that etitioner he"d

+3.3 bi""ion in a secret ban4 account under the name AJose Ve"arde.B

/he ru"in$ )as met by a s ontaneous outburst of an$er that hit the streets of the

metro o"is. /hereafter, the 'rmed &orces and the +=+ )ithdre) their su ort to the

strada $overnment. Some %abinet secretaries, undersecretaries, assistant

secretaries and bureau chiefs resi$ned from their osts. On January 0, 001, at

about 1 noon, %hief Justice Cavide administered the oath to res ondent 'rroyo as

+resident of the +hi"i ines. On the same day, etitioner issued a ress statement

that he )as "eavin$ Ma"acanan$ +a"ace for the sa4e of eace and in order to be$in

the hea"in$ rocess of the nation. :t a"so a eared that on the same day, he si$ned

a "etter statin$ that he )as transmittin$ a dec"aration that he )as unab"e to

e-ercise the o)ers and duties of his office and that by o eration of "a) and the

%onstitution, the Vice +resident sha"" be the 'ctin$ +resident. ' co y of the "etter

)as sent to S ea4er &uentebe""a and Senate +resident +imente" on the same day.

'fter his fa"" from the o)er, the etitioner5s "e$a" rob"ems a eared in c"usters.

Severa" cases revious"y fi"ed a$ainst him in the Office of the Ombudsman )ere set

in motion. +etitioner sou$ht to en6oin the res ondent Ombudsman from conductin$

any further roceedin$s in any crimina" com "aint that may be fi"ed in his office,

unti" after the term of etitioner as +resident is over and on"y if "e$a""y )arranted.

ra a"so fi"ed a Huo arranto case, rayin$ for 6ud$ment Aconfirmin$ etitioner to

be the "a)fu" and incumbent +resident of the @e ub"ic of the +hi"i ines tem orari"y

unab"e to dischar$e the duties of his office, and dec"arin$ res ondent to have ta4en

her oath as and to be ho"din$ the Office of the +resident, on"y in an actin$ ca acity

ursuant to the rovisions of the %onstitution.B

I##-E:

hether or not the etitioner :s on"y tem orari"y unab"e to 'ct as +resident7

T.E !-$T/# $-LING:

/he etitioner is ermanent"y unab"e to act as +resident. #ection 11 o A5tic6e

'II G


15/102

*Congress has the ultimate authority under the Constitution to determine whether

the +resident is incapable of performing his functions., (oth houses of %on$ress

have reco$niDed res ondent 'rroyo as the +resident. /he 2ouse of @e resentative

assed on January


16/102

/his case invo"ves a etition of mandamus and rohibition as4in$ the court to order

the res ondents Secretary of &orei$n 'ffairs, etc. /o issue a trave" documents to

former +res. Marcos and the immediate members of his fami"y and to en6oin the

im "ementation of the +resident!s decision to bar their return to the +hi"i ines.

+etitioners assert that the ri$ht of the Marcoses to return in the +hi"i ines is$uaranteed by the (i"" of @i$hts, s ecifica""y Sections 1 and .

/hey contended that +res. 'quino is )ithout o)er to im air the "iberty of abode of

the Marcoses because on"y a court may do so )ithin the "imits rescribed by "a).

=or the +resident im air their ri$ht to trave" because no "a) has authoriDed her to

do so. /hey further assert that under internationa" "a), their ri$ht to return to the

+hi"i ines is $uaranteed articu"ar"y by the #niversa" Cec"aration of 2uman @i$hts

and the :nternationa" %ovenant on %ivi" and +o"itica" @i$hts, )hich has been ratified

by the +hi"i ines.

I##-E:

hether or not, in the e-ercise of the o)ers $ranted by the constitution, the

+resident E'quinoF may rohibit the Marcoses from returnin$ to the

+hi"i ines7

T.E !-$T/# $-LING:

;:t must be em hasiDed that the individua" ri$ht invo"ved is not the ri$ht to trave"

from the +hi"i ines to other countries or )ithin the +hi"i ines. /hese are )hat the

ri$ht to trave" )ou"d norma""y connote. ssentia""y, the ri$ht invo"ved in this case at

bar is the ri$ht to return to one!s country, a distinct ri$ht under internationa" "a),

inde endent from a"thou$h re"ated to the ri$ht to trave". /hus, the #niversa"

Cec"aration of 2uman @i$hts and the :nternationa" %ovenant on %ivi" and +o"itica"

@i$hts treat the ri$ht to freedom of movement and abode )ithin the territory of a

state, the ri$ht to "eave the country, and the ri$ht to enter one!s country as

se arate and distinct ri$hts. hat the Cec"aration s ea4s of is the ;ri$ht to freedom

of movement and residence )ithin the borders of each state;. On the other hand,

the %ovenant $uarantees the ri$ht to "iberty of movement and freedom to choose

his residence and the ri$ht to be free to "eave any country, inc"udin$ his o)n. Such

ri$hts may on"y be restricted by "a)s rotectin$ the nationa" security, ub"ic order,

ub"ic hea"th or mora"s or the se arate ri$hts of others.


17/102

2o)ever, ri$ht to enter one!s country cannot be arbitrari"y de rived. :t )ou"d be

therefore ina ro riate to construe the "imitations to the ri$ht to return to ones

country in the same conte-t as those ertainin$ to the "iberty of abode and the ri$ht

to trave". /he (i"" of ri$hts treats on"y the "iberty of abode and the ri$ht to trave",

but it is a )e"" considered vie) that the ri$ht to return may be considered, as a$enera""y acce ted rinci "e of :nternationa" Ka) and under our %onstitution as art

of the "a) of the "and.

/he court he"d that +resident did not act arbitrari"y or )ith $rave abuse of discretion

in determinin$ that the return of the &ormer +res. Marcos and his fami"y oses a

serious threat to nationa" interest and )e"fare. +resident 'quino has determined

that the destabi"iDation caused by the return of the Marcoses )ou"d )i e a)ay the

$ains achieved durin$ the ast fe) years after the Marcos re$ime.

/he return of the Marcoses oses a serious threat and therefore rohibitin$ their

return to the +hi"i ines, the instant etition )as C:SM:SS C.


18/102

TITLE : BIRAOGO ET AL VS. PHIL TRUTH COMMISSIONS

ITATI!N: G $ 1%2%3&ATE: &E E()E$ 7, 2010

A T#:

+resident 'quino si$ned . O. =o. 1 estab"ishin$ +hi"i ine /ruth %ommission of

010 E+/%F dated Ju"y 30, 010. +/% is a mere ad hoc body formed under the Office

of the +resident )ith the rimary tas4 to investi$ate re orts of $raft and corru tion

committed by third "eve" ub"ic officers and em "oyees, their co rinci a"s,

accom "ices and accessories durin$ the revious administration, and to submit its

findin$ and recommendations to the +resident, %on$ress and the Ombudsman. +/%

has a"" the o)ers of an investi$ative body. (ut it is not a quasi 6udicia" body as it

cannot ad6udicate, arbitrate, reso"ve, sett"e, or render a)ards in dis utes bet)een

contendin$ arties.

'"" it can do is $ather, co""ect and assess evidence of $raft and corru tion and ma4e

recommendations. :t may have sub oena o)ers but it has no o)er to cite eo "e

in contem t, much "ess order their arrest. '"thou$h it is a fact findin$ body, it

cannot determine from such facts if robab"e cause e-ists as to )arrant the fi"in$ of

information in our courts of "a).

+etitioners as4ed the %ourt to dec"are it unconstitutiona" and to en6oin the +/% from

erformin$ its functions. /hey ar$ued thatG

EaF .O. =o. 1 vio"ates se aration of o)ers as it arro$ates the o)er of the

%on$ress to create a ub"ic office and a ro riate funds for its o eration.

EbF /he rovision of (oo4 :::, %ha ter 10, Section 31 of the 'dministrative %ode of

198* cannot "e$itimiDe .O. =o. 1 because the de"e$ated authority of the +resident

to structura""y reor$aniDe the Office of the +resident to achieve economy, sim "icity

and efficiency does not inc"ude the o)er to create an entire"y ne) ub"ic office

)hich )as hitherto ine-istent "i4e the A/ruth %ommission.B

EcF .O. =o. 1 i""e$a""y amended the %onstitution and statutes )hen it vested the

A/ruth %ommissionB )ith quasi 6udicia" o)ers du "icatin$, if not su ersedin$, those

of the Office of the Ombudsman created under the 198* %onstitution and the COJ

created under the 'dministrative %ode of 198*.

EdF .O. =o. 1 vio"ates the equa" rotection c"ause as it se"ective"y tar$ets for

investi$ation and rosecution officia"s and ersonne" of the revious administration

as if corru tion is their ecu"iar s ecies even as it e-c"udes those of the other

administrations, ast and resent, )ho may be indictab"e.


19/102

@es ondents, throu$h OS , questioned the "e$a" standin$ of etitioners and ar$ued

thatG

EaF .O. =o. 1 does not arro$ate the o)ers of %on$ress because the +resident5s

e-ecutive o)er and o)er of contro" necessari"y inc"ude the inherent o)er to

conduct investi$ations to ensure that "a)s are faithfu""y e-ecuted and that, in any

event, the %onstitution, @evised 'dministrative %ode of 198*, +C =o. 1


20/102

act or issuance other)ise stated, he must have a ersona" and substantia" interest

in the case such that he has sustained, or )i"" sustain, direct in6ury as a resu"t of its

enforcement E3F the question of constitutiona"ity must be raised at the ear"iest

o ortunity and E


21/102

under the %onstitution. One of the reco$niDed o)ers of the +resident $ranted

ursuant to this constitutiona""y mandated duty is the o)er to create ad hoc

committees. /his f"o)s from the obvious need to ascertain facts and determine if

"a)s have been faithfu""y e-ecuted. /he ur ose of a""o)in$ ad hoc investi$atin$

bodies to e-ist is to a""o) an inquiry into matters )hich the +resident is entit"ed to4no) so that he can be ro er"y advised and $uided in the erformance of his

duties re"ative to the e-ecution and enforcement of the "a)s of the "and.

/here )i"" be no a ro riation but on"y an a""otment or a""ocations of e-istin$ funds

a"ready a ro riated. /here is no usur ation on the art of the -ecutive of the

o)er of %on$ress to a ro riate funds. /here is no need to s ecify the amount to

be earmar4ed for the o eration of the commission because, )hatever funds the

%on$ress has rovided for the Office of the +resident )i"" be the very source of the

funds for the commission. /he amount that )ou"d be a""ocated to the +/% sha"" be

sub6ect to e-istin$ auditin$ ru"es and re$u"ations so there is no im ro riety in the

fundin$.

+hi" /ruth %ommission )i"" not su "ant the Ombudsman or the COJ or erode their

res ective o)ers. :f at a"", the investi$ative function of the commission )i""

com "ement those of the t)o offices. /he function of determinin$ robab"e cause

for the fi"in$ of the a ro riate com "aints before the courts remains to be )ith the

COJ and the Ombudsman. +/%5s o)er to investi$ate is "imited to obtainin$ facts so

that it can advise and $uide the +resident in the erformance of his duties re"ative

to the e-ecution and enforcement of the "a)s of the "and. %ourt finds difficu"ty in

u ho"din$ the constitutiona"ity of -ecutive Order =o. 1 in vie) of its a arent

trans$ression of the equa" rotection c"ause enshrined in Section 1, 'rtic"e ::: E(i"" of

@i$htsF of the 198* %onstitution.

qua" rotection requires that a"" ersons or thin$s simi"ar"y situated shou"d be

treated a"i4e, both as to ri$hts conferred and res onsibi"ities im osed. :t requires

ub"ic bodies and institutions to treat simi"ar"y situated individua"s in a simi"ar

manner. /he ur ose of the equa" rotection c"ause is to secure every erson )ithina state5s 6urisdiction a$ainst intentiona" and arbitrary discrimination, )hether

occasioned by the e- ress terms of a statue or by its im ro er e-ecution throu$h

the state5s du"y constituted authorities. /here must be equa"ity amon$ equa"s as

determined accordin$ to a va"id c"assification. qua" rotection c"ause ermits


22/102

c"assification. Such c"assification, ho)ever, to be va"id must ass the test of

reasonab"eness. /he test has four requisitesG E1F /he c"assification rests on

substantia" distinctions E F :t is $ermane to the ur ose of the "a) E3F :t is not

"imited to e-istin$ conditions on"y and E


23/102

im "ementin$ the assai"ed Memorandum. /he defendants C =@ Secretary 'ntonio

2. %eri""es and @e$iona" -ecutive Cirector :srae" %. addi )ere ordered to cease

and desist from doin$ the act com "ained of, name"y, to sto the transfer of C =@

N@e$ion 1 offices from %otabato %ity to oranda" EMarbe"F, South %otabato.

+etitioner fi"ed a Motion for @econsideration )ith Motion to Cismiss, raisin$ the

fo""o)in$ $roundsG E1F /he o)er to transfer the @e$iona" Office of the Ce artment

of nvironment and =atura" @esources EC =@F is e-ecutive in nature. E F /he

decision to transfer the @e$iona" Office is based on -ecutive Order =o. < 9, )hich

reor$aniDed @e$ion L::. E3F /he va"idity of O < 9 has been affirmed by the

2onorab"e Su reme %ourt in the %ase of %hion$bian vs. Orbos E199>F S%@'

>>. E )as fi"ed before the %ourt of ' ea"s,

doc4eted as %' .@. S+ =o. >889 . /he etition )as dismissed outri$ht forG E1F

fai"ure to submit a )ritten e- "anation )hy ersona" service )as not done on the

adverse arty E F fai"ure to attach affidavit of service E3F fai"ure to indicate the

materia" dates )hen co ies of the orders of the "o)er court )ere received E to

substitute a "ost a ea". :n essence, etitioner ar$ues that the tria" court erred in

en6oinin$ it from causin$ the transfer of the C =@ L:: @e$iona" Offices, considerin$

that it )as done ursuant to C =@ 'dministrative Order 99 1


24/102

of his o)ers to the %abinet members e-ce t )hen he is required by the

%onstitution to act in erson or the e-i$encies of the situation demand that he acts

ersona""y ' "yin$ the doctrine of qua"ified o"itica" a$ency, the o)er of the

+resident to reor$aniDe the =ationa" overnment may va"id"y be de"e$ated to his

cabinet members e-ercisin$ contro" over a articu"ar e-ecutive de artment. /hus,in CO/% Secretary v. Maba"ot,N 1 )e he"d that the +resident P throu$h his du"y

constituted o"itica" a$ent and a"ter e$o, the CO/% Secretary P may "e$a""y and

va"id"y decree the reor$aniDation of the Ce artment, articu"ar"y the estab"ishment

of CO/% %'@ as the K/&@( @e$iona" Office at the %ordi""era 'dministrative @e$ion,

)ith the concomitant transfer and erformance of ub"ic functions and

res onsibi"ities a urtenant to a re$iona" office of the K/&@(.

Simi"ar"y, in the case at bar, the C =@ Secretary can va"id"y reor$aniDe the C =@ by

orderin$ the transfer of the C =@ L:: @e$iona" Offices from %otabato %ity to

oronada", South %otabato. /he e-ercise of this authority by the C =@ Secretary,

as an a"ter e$o, is resumed to be the acts of the +resident for the "atter had not

e- ress"y re udiated the same.

:n %hion$bian v. Orbos, this %ourt stressed the ru"e that the o)er of the +resident

to reor$aniDe the administrative re$ions carries )ith it the o)er to determine the

re$iona" centers. :n identifyin$ the re$iona" centers, the +resident ur ose"y

intended the effective de"ivery of the fie"d services of $overnment a$encies. /he

same intention can be $"eaned from the reamb"e of the assai"ed C'O 99 1< )hich

the C =@ sou$ht to achieve, that is, to im rove the efficiency and effectiveness of

the C =@ in de"iverin$ its services.

:t may be true that the transfer of the offices may not be time"y considerin$ thatG

E1F there are no bui"din$s yet to house the re$iona" offices in oronada", E F the

transfer fa""s on the month of @amadan, E3F the chi"dren of the affected em "oyees

are a"ready enro""ed in schoo"s in %otabato %ity, EF the San$$unian$ +an$"un$sond, throu$h a

reso"ution, requested the C =@ Secretary to reconsider the orders. 2o)ever, these

concern issues addressed to the )isdom of the transfer rather than to its "e$a"ity. :t

is basic in our form of $overnment that the 6udiciary cannot inquire into the )isdom

or e- ediency of the acts of the e-ecutive or the "e$is"ative de artment,N < for

each de artment is su reme and inde endent of the others, and each is devoid of

authority not on"y to encroach u on the o)ers or fie"d of action assi$ned to any of

the other de artment, but a"so to inquire into or ass u on the advisabi"ity or)isdom of the acts erformed, measures ta4en or decisions made by the other

de artments.


25/102

/he Su reme %ourt shou"d not be thou$ht of as havin$ been tas4ed )ith the

a)esome res onsibi"ity of overseein$ the entire bureaucracy. #n"ess there is a

c"ear sho)in$ of constitutiona" infirmity or $rave abuse of discretion amountin$ to

"ac4 or e-cess of 6urisdiction, the %ourt5s e-ercise of the 6udicia" o)er, ervasive

and "imit"ess it may seem to be, sti"" must succumb to the aramount doctrine of

se aration of o)ers.N 'fter a carefu" revie) of the records of the case, )e find

that this 6uris rudentia" e"ement of abuse of discretion has not been sho)n to e-ist.

:n vie) of the fore$oin$, the etition for revie) )as $ranted. /he reso"utions of the

%ourt of ' ea"s in %' .@. S+ =o. >889 dated May 31, 000 and 'u$ust 0, 001,as )e"" as the decision dated January 1, in %ivi" %ase =o 389, )ere @ V @S C and S / 'S:C .

/he ermanent in6unction, )hich en6oined the etitioner from enforcin$ the

Memorandum Order of the C =@ L:: @e$iona" -ecutive Cirector )as "ifted.


26/102

TITLE : MONDANO VS. SILVOSA

ITATI!N: %7 4.IL 1*3&ATE: (A 30, 1%

A T#:

Mondano )as the mayor of Mainit, Suri$ao. ' com "aint )as fi"ed a$ainst him for

ra e and concubina$e. /he information reached the 'ssistant -ecutive Secretary

)ho ordered the $overnor to investi$ate the matter. Si"vosa then summoned

Mondano and the "atter a eared before him. /hereafter Si"vosa sus ended

Mondano. Mondano fi"ed a etition for rohibition en6oinin$ the $overnor fromfurther roceedin$. Si"vosa invo4ed the @'% )hich rovided that he, as art of the

e-ecutive and by virtue o the order $iven by the 'sst -ec Sec, is )ith Adirect

contro", direction, and su ervision over a"" bureaus and offices under his 6urisdiction

B and to that end Amay order the investi$ation of any act or conduct of any erson

in the service of any bureau or office under his Ce artment and in connection

there)ith may a oint a committee or desi$nate an officia" or erson )ho sha""

conduct such investi$ations.

I##-E:

hether or not the overnor can e-ercise the o)er of contro"7

T.E !-$T/# $-LING:

/he e-ecutive de artments of the overnment created and or$aniDed before the

a rova" of the %onstitution continued to e-ist as AauthoriDed by "a) unti" the

%on$ress sha"" rovide other)ise.B /he %onstitution rovidesG A/he +resident sha""

have contro" of a"" the e-ecutive de artments, bureaus, or offices, e-ercise $enera"su ervision over a"" "oca" $overnments as may be rovided by "a), and ta4e care

that the "a)s be faithfu""y e-ecuted.B #nder this constitutiona" rovision the

+resident has been invested )ith the o)er of contro" of a"" the e-ecutive

de artments, bureaus, or offices, but not of a"" "oca" $overnments over )hich he has

been $ranted on"y the o)er of $enera" su ervision as may be rovided by "a)

/he Ce artment head as a$ent of the +resident has direct contro" and su ervision

over a"" bureaus and offices under his 6urisdiction as rovided for in section *9EcF of

the @evised 'dministrative %ode, but he does not have the same contro" of "oca"

$overnments as that e-ercised by him over bureaus and offices under his

6urisdiction. Ki4e)ise, his authority to order the investi$ation of any act or conduct

of any erson in the service of any bureau or office under his de artment is

confined to bureaus or offices under his 6urisdiction and does not e-tend to "oca"


27/102

$overnments over )hich, as a"ready stated, the +resident e-ercises on"y $enera"

su ervision as may be rovided by "a). :f the rovisions of section *9

EcF of the @evised 'dministrative %ode are to be construed as conferrin$ u on the

corres ondin$ de artment head direct contro", direction, and su ervision over a""

"oca" $overnments and that for that reason he may order the investi$ation of an

officia" of a "oca" $overnment for ma"feasance in office, such inter retation )ou"d be

contrary to the rovisions of ar 1, sec 10, 'rtic"e *, of the 193> %onstitution. :f

A$enera" su ervision over a"" "oca" $overnmentsB is to be construed as the same

o)er $ranted to the Ce artment 2ead in sec *9 EcF of the @'%, then there )ou"d

no "on$er be a distinction or difference bet)een the o)er of contro" and that of

su ervision. :n administrative "a) su ervision means overseein$ or the o)er or

authority of an officer to see that subordinate officers erform their duties. :f the

"atter fai" or ne$"ect to fu"fi"" them the former may ta4e such action or ste as

rescribed by "a) to ma4e them erform their duties. %ontro", on the other hand,

means the o)er of an officer to a"ter or modify or nu""ify or set aside )hat a

subordinate officer had done in the erformance of his duties and to substitute the

6ud$ment of the former for that of the "atter. Such is the im ort of the rovisions of

sec *9 EcF of the @'%.

/he %on$ress has e- ress"y and s ecifica""y "od$ed the rovincia" su ervision over

munici a" officia"s in the rovincia" $overnor )ho is authoriDed to Areceive and

investi$ate com "aints made under oath a$ainst munici a" officers for ne$"ect of

duty, o ression, corru tion or other form of ma"administration of office, and

conviction by fina" 6ud$ment of any crime invo"vin$ mora" tur itude.B 'nd if thechar$es are serious, Ahe sha"" submit )ritten char$es touchin$ the matter to the

rovincia" board, furnishin$ a co y of such char$es to the accused either ersona""y

or by re$istered mai", and he may in such case sus end the officer Enot bein$ the

munici a" treasurerF endin$ action by the board, if in his o inion the char$e be one

affectin$ the officia" inte$rity of the officer in question.B Sec 8 of the @evised

'dministrative %ode adds nothin$ to the o)er of su ervision to be e-ercised by

the Ce artment 2ead over the administration of munici a"ities :f it be construed

that it does and such additiona" o)er is the same authority as that vested in theCe artment 2ead by sec *9 EcF of the @'%, then such additiona" o)er must be

deemed to have been abro$ated by sec10E1F, 'rtic"e *, of the %onstitution.


28/102

TITLE : VILLENA VS. SECRETARY OF INTERIOR

ITATI!N: "7 4.IL * 1 G $ N! L *" 70&ATE: A4$IL 21, 1%3%

A T#:

+etitioner, Vi""ena )as the then mayor of Ma4ati. 'fter investi$ation, the Secretary

of :nterior recommended the sus ension of Vi""ena )ith the Office of the resident

)ho a roved the same. /he Secretary then sus ended Vi""ena. Vi""ena averred

c"aimin$ that the Secretary has no 6urisdiction over the matter. /he o)er or

6urisdiction is "od$ed in the "oca" $overnment Nthe $overnor ursuant to sec 188 of

the 'dministrative %ode. &urther, even if the res ondent Secretary of the :nterior

has o)er of su ervision over "oca" $overnments, that o)er, accordin$ to the

constitution, must be e-ercised in accordance )ith the rovisions of "a) and the

rovisions of "a) $overnin$ tria"s of char$es a$ainst e"ective munici a" officia"s are

those contained in sec 188 of the 'dministrative %ode as amended.

:n other )ords, the Secretary of the :nterior must e-ercise his su ervision over "oca"

$overnments, if he has that o)er under e-istin$ "a), in accordance )ith sec 188of the 'dministrative %ode, as amended, as the "atter rovisions $overn the

rocedure to be fo""o)ed in sus endin$ and unishin$ e"ective "oca" officia"s )hi"e

sec *9 E%F of the 'dministrative %ode is the $enera "a) )hich must yie"d to the

s ecia" "a).

I##-E:

hether or not the Secretary of :nterior can sus end an K # officia" under

investi$ation7

T.E !-$T/# $-LING:


29/102

/here is no c"ear and e- ress $rant of o)er to the secretary to sus end a mayor of

a munici a"ity )ho is under investi$ation. On the contrary, the o)er a ears

"od$ed in the rovincia" $overnor by sec 188 of the 'dministrative %ode )hich

rovides that A/he rovincia" $overnor sha"" receive and investi$ate com "aints

made under oath a$ainst munici a" officers for ne$"ect of duty, o ression,corru tion or other form of ma"administration of office, and conviction by fina"

6ud$ment of any crime invo"vin$ mora" tur itude. /he fact, ho)ever, that the o)er

of sus ension is e- ress"y $ranted by sec 188 of the 'dministrative %ode to the

rovincia" $overnor does not mean that the $rant is necessari"y e-c"usive and

rec"udes the Secretary of the :nterior from e-ercisin$ a simi"ar o)er.

&or instance, counse" for the etitioner admitted in the ora" ar$ument that the

+resident of the +hi"i ines may himse"f sus end the etitioner from office in virtue

of his $reater o)er of remova" Esec. 191, as amended, 'dministrative %odeF to be

e-ercised conformab"y to "a). :ndeed, if the

+resident cou"d, in the manner rescribed by "a), remove a munici a" officia" it

)ou"d be a "e$a" incon$ruity if he )ere to be devoid of the "esser o)er of

sus ension. 'nd the incon$ruity )ou"d be more atent if, ossessed of the o)er

both to sus end and to remove a rovincia" officia" Esec. 0*8, 'dministrative

%odeF, the +resident )ere to be )ithout the o)er to sus end a munici a" officia".

/he o)er to sus end a munici a" officia" is not e-c"usive. +reventive sus ension

may be issued to $ive )ay for an im artia" investi$ation.


30/102

TITLE : LACSON-MAGALLANES CO. INC VS. PAO

ITATI!N: 21 # $A +% G $ N! L 27+11

&ATE: N!'E()E$ 17, 1%"7

A T#:

Ma$a""anes )as ermitted to use and occu y a "and used for asture in Cavao. /he

said "and )as a forest Done )hich )as "ater dec"ared as an a$ricu"tura" Done.

Ma$a""anes then ceded his ri$hts to KM% of )hich he is a co o)ner. +aQo )as a

farmer )ho asserted his c"aim over the same iece of "and. /he Cirector of Kands

denied +aQo5s request. /he Secretary of '$ricu"ture "i4e)ise denied his etition

hence it )as e"evated to the Office of the +resident. -ec Sec +a6o ru"ed in favor of+aQo.

KM% averred that the ear"ier decision of the Secretary is a"ready conc"usive hence

beyond a ea". 2e a"so averred that the decision of the -ecutive Secretary is an

undue de"e$ation of o)er. /he %onstitution, KM% asserts, does not contain any

rovision )hereby the residentia" o)er of contro" may be de"e$ated to the

-ecutive Secretary.

:t is ar$ued that it is the constitutiona" duty of the +resident to act ersona""y u onthe matter.

I##-E:


31/102

hether or not the o)er of contro" may be de"e$ated to the -ec Sec and

may it be further de"e$ated by the -ecutive Secretary7

T.E !-$T/# $-LING:

/he +resident5s duty to e-ecute the "a) is of constitutiona" ori$in. So, too, is his

contro" of a"" e-ecutive de artments. /hus it is, that de artment heads are men of

his confidence. 2is is the o)er to a oint them his, too, is the rivi"e$e to dismiss

them at "easure. =atura""y, he contro"s and directs their acts. :m "icit then is his

authority to $o over, confirm, modify or reverse the action ta4en by his de artment

secretaries.

:n this conte-t, it may not be said that the +resident cannot ru"e on the correctness

of a decision of a de artment secretary. +arenthetica""y, it may be stated that the

ri$ht to a ea" to the +resident re oses u on the +resident5s o)er of contro" over

the e-ecutive de artments. 'nd contro" sim "y means Athe o)er of an officer to

a"ter or modify or nu""ify or set aside )hat a subordinate officer had done in the

erformance of his duties and to substitute the 6ud$ment of the former for that of

the "atter.B

:t is correct to say that constitutiona" o)ers there are )hich the +resident must

e-ercise in erson. =ot as correct, ho)ever, is it to say that the %hief -ecutivemay not de"e$ate to his -ecutive Secretary acts )hich the %onstitution does not

command that he erform in erson. @eason is not )antin$ for this vie).

/he +resident is not e- ected to erform in erson a"" the mu"tifarious e-ecutive

and administrative functions. /he office of the -ecutive Secretary is an au-i"iary

unit )hich assists the +resident. /he ru"e )hich has thus $ained reco$nition is that

Aunder our constitutiona" setu the -ecutive Secretary )ho acts for and in beha"f

and by authority of the +resident has an undis uted 6urisdiction to affirm, modify, or

even reverse any orderB that the Secretary of '$ricu"ture and =atura" @esources,

inc"udin$ the Cirector of Kands, may issue.


32/102

TITLE : GANZON V.S COURT OF APPEALS

ITATI!N: G $ N! %32 2&ATE: N!'E()E$ +, 1%%1

A T#:

anDon )as the then mayor of :"oi"o %ity. 10 com "aints )ere fi"ed a$ainst him on

$rounds of misconduct and misfeasance of office. /he Secretary of Koca"

overnment issued a 00 day sus ension a$ainst anDon based on the merits of

the com "aints fi"ed a$ainst him. anDon a ea"ed the issue to the %' and the %'

affirmed the sus ension order by the Secretary.

anDon asserted that the 198* %onstitution does not authoriDe the +resident nor

any of his a"ter e$o to sus end and remove "oca" officia"s this is because the 198*

%onstitution su orts "oca" autonomy and stren$thens the same. hat )as $iven by

the resent %onstitution )as mere su ervisory o)er.

I##-E:

hether or not the Secretary of Koca" overnment, as the +resident5s a"ter

e$o, can sus end and or remove "oca" officia"s7

T.E !-$T/# $-LING:

anDon is under the im ression that the %onstitution has "eft the +resident mere

su ervisory o)ers, )hich su osed"y e-c"udes the o)er of investi$ation, and

denied her contro", )hich a""e$ed"y embraces disci "inary authority. :t is a mista4en

im ression because "e$a""y, Asu ervisionB is not incom atib"e )ith disci "inary

authority. /he S% had occasion to discuss the sco e and e-tent of the o)er ofsu ervision by the +resident over "oca" $overnment officia"s in contrast to the o)er

of contro" $iven to him over e-ecutive officia"s of our $overnment )herein it )as

em hasiDed that the t)o terms, contro" and su ervision, are t)o different thin$s

)hich differ one from the other in meanin$ and e-tent.

A:n administration "a) su ervision means overseein$ or the o)er or authority of an

officer to see that subordinate officers erform their duties. :f the "atter fai" or

ne$"ect to fu"fi"" them the former may ta4e such action or ste as rescribed by "a)

to ma4e them erform their duties. %ontro", on the other hand, means the o)er of

an officer to a"ter or modify or nu""ify of set aside )hat a subordinate officer had

done in the erformance of his duties and to substitute the 6ud$ment of the former

for that of the "atter.B (ut from this ronouncement it cannot be reasonab"y inferred

that the o)er of su ervision of the +resident over "oca" $overnment officia"s does


33/102

not inc"ude the o)er of investi$ation )hen in his o inion the $ood of the ub"ic

service so requires.

/he Secretary of Koca" overnment, as the a"ter e$o of the resident, in sus endin$

anDon is e-ercisin$ a va"id o)er. 2e ho)ever overste ed by im osin$ a 00 daysus ension.

/he ur$ent motion of etitioner, dated * Se tember 1991 )as $ranted. /he

tem orary restrainin$ order dated > Se tember 1991 )as "ifted. @es ondents are

ordered to a""o) etitioner to re assume his office as e"ected Mayor of :"oi"o %ity

effective immediate"y.

/he %ourt of ' ea" is directed to dismiss %' .@. S+ =o. >8 'u$ust 1991.

+etitioner, Mayor @odo"fo anDon, may not be made to serve future sus ensions on

account of any of the remainin$ administrative char$es endin$ a$ainst him for

acts committed rior to 'u$ust 11, 1988.


34/102

TITLE : DADOLE VS COMMISSION ON AUDIT

ITATI!N: G $ N! 12 3 0&ATE: &E E()E$ 3, 2002

A T#:

:n 198 , the @/% and M/% 6ud$es of Mandaue %ity started receivin$ month"y

a""o)ances of +1, 0 each throu$h the year"y a ro riation ordinance enacted by

the San$$unian$ +an"un$sod of the said city. :n 1991, Mandaue %ity increased the

amount to +1,>00 for each 6ud$e. On March 1>, 199> EK(% >>F

)hich rovided that :n the "i$ht of the authority $ranted to the "oca" $overnment

units under the Koca" overnment %ode to rovide for additiona" a""o)ances and

other benefits to nationa" $overnment officia"s and em "oyees assi$ned in their

"oca"ity, such additiona" a""o)ances in the form of honorarium at rates not

e-ceedin$ +1,000.00 in rovinces and cities and +*00.00 in munici a"ities may be

$ranted sub6ect to the fo""o)in$ conditionsG aF /hat the $rant is not mandatory on

the art of the K #s bF /hat a"" contractua" and statutory ob"i$ations of the K #

inc"udin$ the im "ementation of @.'. *>8 sha"" have been fu""y rovided in the

bud$et cF /hat the bud$etary requirements?"imitations under Section 3 < and 3 >

of @.'. *1 0 shou"d be satisfied and?or com "ied )ith and dF /hat the K # has fu""y

im "emented the devo"ution of functions? ersonne" in accordance )ith @.'. *1 0.

'ctin$ on the C(M directive, the Mandaue %ity 'uditor issued notices of

disa""o)ance to herein etitioners, name"y, 2onorab"e @/% Jud$es Mercedes .

Cado"e, #"ric @. %aQete, '$ustin @. Vesti", 2onorab"e M/% Jud$es /emistoc"es M.(oho"st, Vicente %. &ani"a$ and i"fredo '. Ca$atan, in e-cess of the amount

authoriDed by K(% >>. (e$innin$ October, 199


35/102

reimburse the amount they received in e-cess of +1,000 from ' ri" to Se tember,

199, -ecutive Jud$e Mercedes

oDo Cado"e, for and in beha"f of the etitioner 6ud$es, fi"ed a motion for

reconsideration of the decision of the %O'. :n a reso"ution dated May 8, 199 , the

%O' denied the motion.

I##-E:

hether or not the administrative circu"ar or $uide"ine such as Koca" (ud$et

%ircu"ar =o. >> render ino erative the o)er of the "e$is"ative body of a city

by settin$ a "imit /o the e-tent of the e-ercise of such o)er7

T.E !-$T/# $-LING:

'ccordin$ to res ondent %O', even if K(% >> )ere void, the ordinances enacted by

Mandaue %ity $rantin$ additiona" a""o)ances to the etitioner 6ud$es )ou"d Asti""

EbeF bereft of "e$a" basis for )ant of a "a)fu" source of funds considerin$ that the

:@' cannot be used for such purposes .B @es ondent %O' sho)ed that Mandaue

%ity5s funds consisted of "oca""y $enerated revenues and the :@'. &rom 1989 to

199>, Mandaue %ity5s year"y e- enditures e-ceeded its "oca""y $enerated revenues,

thus resu"tin$ in a deficit. Curin$ a"" those years, it )as the :@' that enab"ed

Mandaue %ity to incur a sur "us. @es ondent avers that Mandaue %ity used its :@'

to ay for said additiona" a""o)ances and this vio"ated ara$ra h of the S ecia"

+rovisions, a$e 10 0, of @' *8 E/he enera" ' ro riations 'ct of 199>F 1N1

and ara$ra h 3 of the S ecia" +rovision, a$e 1 >, of @' * 3 E/he enera"

' ro riations 'ct of 199


36/102

e- enditure of the :@'. =o)here in said rovisions of the t)o bud$etary "a)s does it

say that the :@' can be used for additiona" a""o)ances of 6ud$es. @es ondent %O'

thus ar$ues that the rovisions in the ordinance rovidin$ for such disbursement

are a$ainst the "a), considerin$ that the $rant of the sub6ect a""o)ances is not

)ithin the s ecified use a""o)ed by the aforesaid year"y a ro riations acts.

@es ondent %O' fai"ed to rove that Mandaue %ity used the :@' to s end for the

additiona" a""o)ances of the 6ud$es. /here )as no evidence submitted by %O'

sho)in$ the brea4do)n of the e- enses of the city $overnment and the funds used

for said e- enses. '"" the %O' resented )ere the amounts e- ended, the "oca""y

$enerated revenues, the deficit, the sur "us and the :@' received each year. 'side

from these items, no data or fi$ures )ere resented to sho) that Mandaue %ity

deducted the sub6ect a""o)ances from the :@'. :n other )ords, 6ust becauseMandaue %ity5s "oca""y $enerated revenues )ere not enou$h to cover its

e- enditures, this did not mean that the additiona" a""o)ances of etitioner 6ud$es

)ere ta4en from the :@' and not from the city5s o)n revenues.

Moreover, the C(M neither conducted a forma" revie) nor ordered a disa rova" of

Mandaue %ity5s a ro riation ordinances, in accordance )ith the rocedure out"ined

by Sections 3 and 3 * of @' *1 0 )hich rovide thatG

Section 3 . @evie) of ' ro riation Ordinances of +rovinces, 2i$h"y #rbaniDed

%ities, :nde endent %om onent %ities, and Munici a"ities )ithin the Metro o"itan

Mani"a 'rea. /he Ce artment of (ud$et and Mana$ement sha"" revie) ordinances

authoriDin$ the annua" or su "ementa" a ro riations of rovinces, hi$h"y

urbaniDed cities, inde endent com onent cities, and munici a"ities )ithin theMetro o"itan Mani"a 'rea in accordance )ith the immediate"y succeedin$ Section.

Section 3 *. @evie) of ' ro riation Ordinances of %om onent %ities and

Munici a"ities. /he san$$uninan$ an"a"a)i$an sha"" revie) the ordinance

authoriDin$ annua" or su "ementa" a ro riations of com onent cities and

munici a"ities in the same manner and )ithin the same eriod rescribed for the

revie) of other ordinances.

:f )ithin ninety E90F days from recei t of co ies of such ordinance, the san$$unian$

an"a"a)i$an ta4es no action thereon, the same sha"" be deemed to have been

revie)ed in accordance )ith "a) and sha"" continue to be in fu"" force and effect.


37/102

ithin 90 days from recei t of the co ies of the a ro riation ordinance, the C(M

shou"d have ta4en ositive action. Other)ise, such ordinance )as deemed to have

been ro er"y revie)ed and deemed to have ta4en effect. :nasmuch as, in the

instant case, the C(M did not fo""o) the a ro riate rocedure for revie)in$ the

sub6ect ordinance of Mandaue %ity and a""o)ed the 90 day eriod to "a se, it can no"on$er question the "e$a"ity of the rovisions in the said ordinance $rantin$

additiona" a""o)ances to 6ud$es stationed in the said city.

/he etition )as $ranted and the assai"ed decision and reso"ution, dated Se tember

1, 199> and May 8, 199 , res ective"y, of the %ommission on 'udit )ere set

aside.

TITLE : GPI VS. SPRINGER

ITATI!N: 0 4.IL 2 % G $ N! 2"%7%&ATE: A4$IL 1, 1%27

A T#:

Sometime in the 1900s, the =ationa" %oa" %om any E=%%F )as created by the

+hi"i ine %on$ress. /he "a) created it E'ct =o. 8 F rovides thatG A/he votin$

o)er R sha"" be vested e-c"usive"y in a committee consistin$ of the overnor

enera", the +resident of the Senate, and the S ea4er of the 2ouse of

@e resentatives.B

:n =ovember 19 , the overnor enera" EKeonard oodF issued .O. =o. 3* )hich

divested the votin$ ri$hts of the Senate +resident and 2ouse S ea4er in the =%%.

/he O em hasiDed that the votin$ ri$ht shou"d be so"e"y "od$ed in the overnor

enera" )ho is the head of the $overnment E+resident at that time )as considered


38/102

the head of state but does not mana$e $overnment affairsF. ' co y of the said O

)as furnished to the Senate +resident and the 2ouse S ea4er.

2o)ever, in Cecember 19 , =%% he"d its e"ections and the Senate +resident as

)e"" as the 2ouse S ea4er, not)ithstandin$ O =o. 3* and the ob6ection of theovernor enera", sti"" e"ected Mi"ton S rin$er and four others as (oard of

Cirectors of =%%. /hereafter, a 8uo warranto roceedin$ in beha"f of the

$overnment )as fi"ed a$ainst S rin$er et a" questionin$ the va"idity of their e"ection

into the (oard of =%%.

I##-E:

hether or not the Senate +resident as )e"" as the 2ouse S ea4er can va"id"y

e"ect the (oard Members of =%%7

T.E !-$T/# $-LING:

.O. =o 3* is va"id. :t is in accordance )ith the doctrine of se aration of o)ers. /he

Su reme %ourt em hasiDed that the "e$is"ature creates the ub"ic office but it has

nothin$ to do )ith desi$natin$ the ersons to fi"" the office. ' ointin$ ersons to a

ub"ic office is essentia""y e-ecutive. /he =%% is a $overnment o)ned and

contro""ed cor oration. :t )as created by %on$ress. /o e-tend the o)er of

%on$ress into a""o)in$ it, throu$h the Senate +resident and the 2ouse S ea4er, to

a oint members of the =%% is a"ready an invasion of e-ecutive o)ers. /he

Su reme %ourt ho)ever notes that indeed there are e-ce tions to this ru"e )here

the "e$is"ature may a oint ersons to fi"" ub"ic office. Such e-ce tion can be

found in the a ointment by the "e$is"ature of ersons to fi"" offices )ithin the

"e$is"ative branch P this e-ce tion is a""o)ab"e because it does not )ea4en the

e-ecutive branch.

very other consideration to one side, this remains certain /he con$ress of the

#nited States c"ear"y intended that the overnor enera"5s o)er shou"d be

commensurate )ith his res onsibi"ity. /he %on$ress never intended that the

overnor enera" shou"d be sadd"ed )ith the res onsibi"ity of administerin$ the

$overnment and of e-ecutin$ the "a)s but shorn of the o)er to do so. /he

interests of the +hi"i ines )i"" be best served by strict adherence to the basic

rinci "es of constitutiona" $overnment.


39/102

/here )as no hesitancy in conc"udin$ that so much of section < of 'ct =o. *0>, as

amended by section of 'ct =o. 8 , as ur orts to vest the votin$ o)er of the

$overnment o)ned stoc4 in the =ationa" %oa" %om any in the +resident of the

Senate and the S ea4er of the 2ouse of @e resentatives, is unconstitutiona" and

void. :t resu"ts, therefore, in the demurrer bein$ overru"ed, and as it )ou"d beim racticab"e for the defendants to ans)er, 6ud$ment sha"" be rendered oustin$ and

e-c"udin$ them from the offices of directors of the =ationa" %oa" %om any.

TITLE : SARMIENTO VS. MISON

ITATI!N: 1 " # $A *% G $ N! 7%%7*&ATE: &E E()E$ 17, 1%+7

A T#:


40/102

:n this etition for rohibition, the etitioners, )ho are ta- ayers, "a)yers, members

of the :nte$rated (ar of the +hi"i ines and rofessors of %onstitutiona" Ka), see4 to

en6oin the res ondent Sa"vador Mison from erformin$ the functions of the Office of

%ommissioner of the (ureau of %ustoms and the res ondent ui""ermo %ara$ue, as

Secretary of the Ce artment of (ud$et, from effectin$ disbursements in ayment ofMison5s sa"aries and emo"uments, on the $round that Mison5s a ointment as

%ommissioner of the (ureau of %ustoms is unconstitutiona" by reason of its not

havin$ been confirmed by the %ommission on ' ointments.

/he res ondents, on the other hand, maintain the constitutiona"ity of res ondent

Mison5s a ointment )ithout the confirmation of the %ommission on ' ointments.

I##-E:

hether or not a"" a ointments made by the resident require a rova" of

the %ommission on ' ointments to be va"id7

T.E !-$T/# $-LING:

#ection 1", A5tic6e 'II of the 198* %onstitution rovides A/he +resident sha""

nominate and, )ith the consent of the %ommission on ' ointments, a oint the

heads of the e-ecutive de artments, ambassadors, other ub"ic ministers and

consu"s, or officers of the armed forces from the ran4 of co"one" or nava" ca tain,

and other officers )hose a ointments are vested in him in this %onstitution. 2e

sha"" a"so a oint a"" other officers of the overnment )hose a ointments are not

other)ise rovided for by "a), and those )hom he may be authoriDed by "a) to

a oint. /he %on$ress may, by "a), vest the a ointment of other officers "o)er in

ran4 in the +resident a"one, in the courts, or in the heads of the de artments,

a$encies, commissions or boards.

/he +resident sha"" have the o)er to ma4e a ointments durin$ the recess of the

%on$ress, )hether vo"untary or com u"sory, but such a ointments sha"" be

effective on"y unti" disa rova" by the %ommission on ' ointments or unti" the

ne-t ad6ournment of the %on$ress.

:t is a arent, that there are four E


41/102

&irst, the heads of the e-ecutive de artments, ambassadors, other ub"ic ministers

and consu"s, officers of the armed forces from the ran4 of co"one" or nava" ca tain,

and other officers )hose a ointments are vested in him in this %onstitution

Second, a"" other officers of the overnment )hose a ointments are not other)ise

rovided for by "a)

/hird, those )hom the +resident may be authoriDed by "a) to a oint

&ourth, officers "o)er in ran4 )hose a ointments the %on$ress may by "a) vest in

the +resident a"one.

/he first $rou of officers is c"ear"y a ointed )ith the consent of the %ommission

on ' ointments. ' ointments of such officers are initiated by nomination and, if

the nomination is confirmed by the %ommission on ' ointments, the +resident

a oints. /he second, third and fourth $rou s of officers are the resent bone of

contention. (y fo""o)in$ the acce ted ru"e in constitutiona" and statutory

construction that an e- ress enumeration of sub6ects e-c"udes others not

enumerated, it )ou"d fo""o) that on"y those a ointments to ositions e- ress"y

stated in the first $rou require the consent EconfirmationF of the %ommission on

' ointments.

/he osition of %ommissioner of the (ureau of %ustoms Ea bureau headF is not oneof those )ithin the first $rou of a ointments )here the consent of the

%ommission on ' ointments is required. 's a matter of fact, as a"ready ointed

out, )hi"e the 193> %onstitution inc"udes Aheads of bureausB amon$ those officers

)hose a ointments need the consent of the %ommission on ' ointments, the

198* %onstitution on the other hand, de"iberate"y e-c"uded the osition of Aheads of

bureausB from a ointments that need the consent EconfirmationF of the

%ommission on ' ointments.

%onsequent"y, )e ru"e that the +resident of the +hi"i ines acted )ithin her

constitutiona" authority and o)er in a ointin$ res ondent Sa"vador Mison,

%ommissioner of the (ureau of %ustoms, )ithout submittin$ his nomination to the

%ommission on ' ointments for confirmation. 2e is thus entit"ed to e-ercise the

fu"" authority and functions of the office and to receive a"" the sa"aries and

emo"uments ertainin$ thereto.


42/102

TITLE : CONCEPTION- BAUTISTA VS. SALONGA

ITATI!N: 172 # $A 1"0 G $ N! +"*3%&ATE: A4$IL 13, 1%+%

A T#:

On 'u$ust *, 198*, +resident %ory 'quino a ointed etitioner (autista as

ermanent %hairman of the %ommission on 2uman @i$hts E%2@F. (autista too4 her

oath of office on Cecember , 1988 to %hief Justice Marce"o &ernan and

immediate"y acted as such.

On January 9, 1989, the Secretary of the %ommission on ' ointments E%o'F )rote

a "etter to (autista requestin$ for her resence a"on$ )ith severa" documents at the

office of %o' on January 19. (autista refused to be "aced under %o'!s revie) hence

this etition fi"ed )ith the Su reme %ourt.

hi"e )aitin$ for the ro$ress of the case, +resident 'quino a ointed 2esiquio @.

Ma""i""in as ;'ctin$ %hairman of the %ommission on 2uman @i$hts; but he )as not

ab"e to sit in his a ointive office because of (autista!s refusa" to surrender her

ost. Ma"i"in invo4ed O 1 3 ' )hich rovides that the tenure of the %hairman and

the %ommissioners of the %2@ shou"d be at the "easure of the +resident thus

statin$ that (autista sha"" be subsequent"y removed as )e"".

I##-E:

hether or not (autista5s a ointment is sub6ect to %o'5s confirmation7

T.E !-$T/# $-LING:

Since the osition of %hairman of the %2@ is not amon$ the ositions mentioned in

the first sentence of Sec. 1 , 'rt. * of the 198* %onstitution, a ointments to )hich

are to be made )ith the confirmation of the %o' it fo""o)s that the a ointment by

the +resident of the %hairman of the %2@ is to be made )ithout the revie) or

artici ation of the %o'. /o be more recise, the a ointment of the %hairman and

Members of the %2@ is not s ecifica""y rovided for in the %onstitution itse"f, un"i4e

the %hairmen and Members of the %S%, the %o and the %O', )hose a ointments

are e- ress"y vested by the %onstitution in the +resident )ith the consent of the

%o'. /he +resident a oints the %hairman and Members of the %2@ ursuant to the

second sentence in Sec 1 , 'rt. *, that is, )ithout the confirmation of the %o'

because they are amon$ the officers of $overnment A)hom he Ethe +residentF may


43/102

be authoriDed by "a) to a oint.B 'nd Sec EcF, O 1 3 authoriDes the +resident to

a oint the %hairman and Members of the %2@.

(ecause of the fact that the resident submitted to the %o' on 1< Jan 1989 the

a ointment of (autista, the %o' ar$ued that the resident thou$h she has the so"e

rero$ative to ma4e %2@ a ointments may from time to time as4 confirmation

)ith the %o'. /his is untenab"e accordin$ to the S%. /he %onstitution has b"oc4edoff certain a ointments for the +resident to ma4e )ith the artici ation of the

%ommission on ' ointments, so a"so has the %onstitution mandated that the

+resident can confer no o)er of artici ation in the %ommission on ' ointments

over other a ointments e-c"usive"y reserved for her by the %onstitution. /he

e-ercise of o"itica" o tions that finds no su ort in the %onstitution cannot be

sustained. &urther, even if the resident may vo"untari"y submit to the commission

on a ointments an a ointment that under the constitution so"e"y be"on$s to her,

sti"", there )as no vacancy to )hich an a ointment cou"d be made on 1< January1989. /here can be no ad interim a ointments in the %2@ for the a ointment

thereto is not sub6ect to %o'5s confirmation. ' ointments to the %2@ is a")ays

ermanent in nature.

/he rovisions of O 1 3 ' is unconstitutiona" and cannot be invo4ed by Ma""i""in.

/he %hairman and the %ommissioners of the %2@ cannot be removed at the

"easure of the resident for it is constitutiona""y $uaranteed that they must have a

term of office.


44/102

TITLE : RUFINO VS. ENDRIGA

ITATI!N: G $ N! 13% *&ATE: J-L 21, 200"

A T#:

+residentia" Cecree =o. 1> E+C 1>F created the %u"tura" %enter of the +hi"i ines

E%%+F for the rimary ur ose of ro a$atin$ arts and cu"ture in the +hi"i ines. +C

1> increased the members of %%+!s (oard from seven to nine trustees. Kater,

-ecutive Order =o. 10>8, increased further the trustees to 11. ventua""y, durin$

the term of @amos, the %%+ (oard inc"uded the ndri$a rou . strada a ointed

seven ne) trustees to the %%+ (oard for a term of four years to re "ace the ndri$a

$rou as )e"" as t)o other incumbent trustees. /he @ufino $rou too4 their oaths of

office and assumed the erformance of their duties. /he ndri$a $rou fi"ed a

etition for quo )arranto questionin$ strada!s a ointment of seven ne) members

to the %%+ (oard. /hey c"aimed that it is on"y )hen the %%+ (oard is entire"y vacant

may the +resident of the +hi"i ines fi"" such vacancies, actin$ in consu"tation )ith

the ran4in$ officers of the %%+.

/he c"ear and cate$orica" "an$ua$e of Section EbF of +C 1> states that vacancies in

the %%+ (oard sha"" be fi""ed by a ma6ority vote of the remainin$ trustees. Shou"d

on"y one trustee survive, the vacancies sha"" be fi""ed by the survivin$ trustee actin$

in consu"tation )ith the ran4in$ officers of the %%+. Shou"d the (oard become

entire"y vacant, the vacancies sha"" be fi""ed by the +resident of the +hi"i ines

actin$ in consu"tation )ith the same ran4in$ officers of the %%+. /hus, the

remainin$ trustees, )hether one or more, e"ect their fe""o) trustees for a fi-ed fouryear term. On the other hand, Section EcF of +C 1> does not a""o) trustees to

ree"ect fe""o) trustees for more than t)o consecutive terms.

/he ndri$a $rou asserted that )hen former +resident strada a ointed the

@ufino $rou , on"y one seat )as vacant due to the e- iration of MaQosa!s term. /he


45/102

%%+ (oard then had 10 incumbent trustees. /hey maintained that under the %%+

%harter, the trustees! fi-ed four year term cou"d on"y be terminated ;by reason of

resi$nation, inca acity, death, or other cause.; +residentia" action )as neither

necessary nor 6ustified since the %%+ (oard then sti"" had 10 incumbent trustees

)ho had the statutory o)er to fi"" by e"ection any vacancy in the (oard.

/he ndri$a $rou refused to acce t that the %%+ )as under the su ervision and

contro" of the +resident. /he ndri$a $rou cited Section 3 of +C 1>, )hich states

that the %%+ ;sha"" en6oy autonomy of o"icy and o eration.; @ufino rou G that the

"a) cou"d on"y de"e$ate to the %%+ (oard the o)er to a oint officers "o)er in ran4

than the trustees of the (oard. Section EbF of +C 1> authoriDin$ the %%+ trustees to

e"ect their fe""o) trustees shou"d be dec"ared unconstitutiona" bein$ re u$nant to

Section 1 , 'rtic"e V:: of the 198* %onstitution a""o)in$ the a ointment on"y of

;officers "o)er in ran4; than the a ointin$ o)er. %' entit"ed the ndri$a $rou

office.

I##-E#:

hether or not there is an inva"id de"e$ation of the +resident!s a ointin$

o)er under the %onstitution7

hether or not it effective"y de rives the +resident of his constitutiona"

o)er of contro" and su ervision over the %%+7

T.E !-$T/# $-LING:

/he source of the +resident!s o)er to a oint, as )e"" as the Ke$is"ature!s authority

to de"e$ate the o)er to a oint, is found in Section 1 , 'rtic"e V:: of the 198*

%onstitution )hich rovides the +resident sha"" nominate and, )ith the consent of

the %ommission on ' ointments, a oint the heads of the e-ecutive de artments,ambassadors, other ub"ic ministers and consu"s, or officers of the armed forces

from the ran4 of co"one" or nava" ca tain, and other officers )hose a ointments

are vested in him in this %onstitution. 2e sha"" a"so a oint a"" other officers of the

overnment )hose a ointments are not other)ise rovided for by "a), and those

)hom he may be authoriDed by "a) to a oint. /he %on$ress may, by "a), vest the

a ointment of other officers "o)er in ran4 in the +resident a"one, in the courts, or

in the heads of de artments, a$encies, commissions, or board. /he +resident sha""

have the o)er to ma4e a ointments durin$ the recess of the %on$ress, )hethervo"untary or com u"sory, but such a ointments sha"" be effective on"y unti"

disa rova" by the %ommission on ' ointments or unti" the ne-t ad6ournment of

the %on$ress.


46/102

/he o)er to a oint is the rero$ative of the +resident, e-ce t in those instances

)hen the %onstitution rovides other)ise. #sur ation of this fundamenta""y

-ecutive o)er by the Ke$is"ative and Judicia" branches vio"ates the system of

se aration of o)ers that inheres in our democratic re ub"ican $overnment. #nder

Section 1 , 'rtic"e V:: of the 198* %onstitution, the +resident a oints three $rou sof officers.

1. heads of the -ecutive de artments, ambassadors, other ub"ic ministers and

consu"s, officers of the armed forces from the ran4 of co"one" or nava" ca tain,

and other officers )hose a ointments are vested in the +resident by the

%onstitution )ith the %ommission of ' ointment5s consent.

. those )hom the +resident may be authoriDed by "a) to a oint. %onsent not

required.

3. a"" other officers of the overnment )hose a ointments are not other)ise

rovided by "a). %onsent not required a oints the third $rou of officers if the

"a) is si"ent on )ho is the a ointin$ o)er, or if the "a) authoriDin$ the head

of a de artment, a$ency, commission, or board to a oint is dec"ared

unconstitutiona".

/hus, if Section EbF and EcF of +C 1> is found unconstitutiona", the +resident sha""a oint the trustees of the %%+ (oard because the trustees fa"" under the third

$rou of officers. /here is a fourth $rou of "o)er ran4ed officers )hose

a ointments %on$ress may by "a) vest in the heads of de artments, a$encies,

commissions, or boards.

/he residentia" o)er of contro" over the -ecutive branch of $overnment e-tends

to a"" e-ecutive em "oyees from the Ce artment Secretary to the "o)"iest c"er4. 3>

/his constitutiona" o)er of the +resident is se"f e-ecutin$ and does not require any

im "ementin$ "a). %on$ress cannot "imit or curtai" the +resident!s o)er of contro"

over the -ecutive branch. /he %%+ fa""s under the -ecutive branch. Since the

+resident e-ercises contro" over ;a"" the e-ecutive de artments, bureaus, and

offices,; the +resident necessari"y e-ercises contro" over the %%+ )hich is an office

in the -ecutive branch. :n mandatin$ that the +resident ;sha"" have contro" of all

e ecutive offices ,; Section 1*, 'rtic"e V:: of the 198* %onstitution does not

e-em t any e-ecutive office one erformin$ e-ecutive functions outside of the

inde endent constitutiona" bodies from the +resident!s o)er of contro". /here is
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/jul2006/gr_139554_2006.html#fnt35http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/jul2006/gr_139554_2006.html#fnt35


47/102

no dis ute that the %%+ erforms e-ecutive, and not "e$is"ative, 6udicia", or quasi

6udicia" functions.

/he Ke$is"ature cannot va"id"y enact a "a) that uts a $overnment office in the

-ecutive branch outside the contro" of the +resident in the $uise of insu"atin$ that

office from o"itics or ma4in$ it inde endent. :f the office is art of the -ecutive

branch, it must remain sub6ect to the contro" of the +resident. Other)ise, the

Ke$is"ature can de rive the +resident of his constitutiona" o)er of contro" over ;a""

the e-ecutive - - - offices.; :f the Ke$is"ature can do this )ith the -ecutive branch,

then the Ke$is"ature can a"so dea" a simi"ar b"o) to the Judicia" branch by enactin$ a

"a) uttin$ decisions of certain "o)er courts beyond the revie) o)er of the

Su reme %ourt. /his )i"" destroy the system of chec4s and ba"ances fine"y

structured in the 198* %onstitution amon$ the -ecutive, Ke$is"ative, and Judicia"

branches.

Section EbF and EcF of +C 1>, )hich authoriDes the trustees of the %%+ (oard to fi""

vacancies in the (oard, runs afou" )ith the +

Case Digests 14

Documents