H om e

Ab o u t U b er D i g es ts

S CRA

Au di o C o da l s

Leg a l E n g l i s h

F i l i p i n o l o s o p hy

F or um

2 0 11 B a r Q u es ti o n s

Q u i z z es An d E x a m s

LAW M E M E S

Search

Advertise on this site Powered By adBrite

Fin d Ub e r D ige s ts O n Fa ce b o o k ! Facebo o kUberDiges ts 98 5Ub Ub e rD ige s ts

Calderon vs Carale

Mary Concepcion-Bautista vs Commission Appointments & Mallillin

Ulpiano Sarmiento III et al vs Salvador Mison & Carague

o n O cto b e r 3 1 , 2 0 1 1 0 0

Karen

Kate

G abrielle

Jam aica

Facebook

Political Law Appointments

This is the 1st major case under the 1987 Constitution. Mison was appointed as the Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs and Carague as the Secretary of the Department of Budget. Their appointment was done without the concurrence of the CoA. Ulpiano, being members of the bar, taxpayers, and professors of constitutional law questioned the appointment of the two sans confirmation by the CoA. IS S UE: Whether or not the appointment is valid. HELD: It is readily apparent that under the provisions of the 1987 Constitution, there are four (4) groups of officers whom the President shall appoint. These four (4) groups are: First, the heads of the executive departments, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain, and other officers whose appointments are vested in him in this Constitution; S e cond, all othe r office rs of the Gove rnme nt w hos e appointme nts are not othe rw is e provide d for by law ; Third, thos e w hom the Pre s ide nt may be authorize d by law to appoint; Fourth, office rs low e r in rank w hos e appointme nts the Cong re s s may by law ve s t in the Pre s ide nt alone . The 2nd, 3rd and 4th groups of officers are the present bone of contention. Should they be appointed by the President with or without the consent (confirmation) of the CoA? By following the accepted rule in constitutional and statutory construction that an express enumeration of subjects excludes others not enumerated, it would follow that only those appointments to positions expressly stated in the first group require the consent (confirmation) of the CoA. Because of the conflicting extremes provided in the 2 previous Constitutions, the framers of the 1987 Constitution and the people adopting it, struck a middle ground by requiring the consent (confirmation) of the CoA for the 1st group of appointments and leaving to the President, without such confirmation, the appointment of other officers, i.e., those in the 2nd and 3rd groups as well as those in the 4th group, i.e., officers of lower rank. As to the 4th group of officers whom the President can appoint, it was pointed out by the intervener CoA that the 3r sentence in Sec. 16, Article 7 of the 1987 Constitution, which reads: The Congress may, by law, vest the appointment of other officers lower in rank in the President alone, in the courts, or in the heads of departments, agencies, commissions, or boards. since a law is needed to vest the appointment of lower-ranked officers in the President alone, this implies that, in the absence of such a law, lower-ranked officers have to be appointed by the President subject to confirmation by the CoA; and, if this is so, as to lower-ranked officers, it follows that higher-ranked officers should be appointed by the President, subject also to confirmation by the CoA. Ulpiano et al argued that the third sentence of Sec. 16, Article 7, merely declares that, as to lower-ranked officers, the Congress may by law vest their appointment in the President, in the courts, or in the heads of the various departments, agencies, commissions, or boards in the government. No reason however is submitted for the use of the word alone in said third sentence The SC ruled that both arguments are not correct. After a careful study of the deliberations of the 1986 Constitutional Commission, that the use of the word alone after the word President in said third sentence of Sec. 16, Article 7 is, more than anything else, a slip or lapse in draftsmanship. In the 1987 Constitution the clear and expressed intent of its framers was to exclude presidential appointments from confirmation by the CoA, except appointments to offices expressly mentioned in the first sentence of Sec. 16, Article 7. Consequently, there was no reason to use in the third sentence of Sec. 16, Article 7 the word alone after the word President in providing that Congress may by law vest the appointment of lower-ranked officers in the President alone, or in the courts, or in the heads of departments, because the power to appoint officers whom he (the President) may be authorized by law to appoint is already vested in the President, without need of confirmation by the CoA, in the second sentence of the same Sec. 16, Article 7.

S p o n s o rs

S p o n s o re d Ad s

Advertise on this site Powered By adBrite

Your Ad Here
In s id e Ub e r D ige s ts

S p o n s o rs

Therefore, the 3rd sentence of Sec. 16, Article 7 could have stated merely that, in the case of lower-ranked officers, the Congress may by law vest their appointment in the President, in the courts, or in the heads of various departments of the government. In short, the word alone in the third sentence of Sec. 16, Article 7 of the 1987 Constitution, as a literal import from the 1935 Constitution, appears to be redundant in the light of the second sentence of Sec. 16, Article 7. And, this redundancy cannot prevail over the clear and positive intent of the framers of the 1987 Constitution that presidential appointments, except those mentioned in the first sentence of Sec. 16, Article 7, are not subject to confirmation by the CoA. Misons and Caragues appointments are affirmed affirmed.

Read full text here.

Tagged with: appointments case brief case digest constitutional law G.R. No. 79974 Jurisprudence political law S armiento vs Mison Ulpiano S armiento III et al vs S alvador Mison & Carague

Tag Cloud

Department Email Addresses Blog

Booking Make money blogging Affiliate program commission Government Jobs Vest

Add a co mment... Co mme n t u s in g. . .

Facebook social plugin