Professional Documents
Culture Documents
All structural units in LRC and in the To reiterate, the position which private
registries of deeds, and all Positions therein respondent Garcia would like to occupy
shall cease to exist from the date specified in anew was abolished pursuant to Executive
the implementing order to be issued by the Order No. 649, a valid reorganization
President pursuant to the preceding measure. There is no vested property right
paragraph. Their pertinent functions, to be re employed in a reorganized office.
applicable appropriations, records, Not being a member of the Bar, the
equipment and property shall be transferred minimum requirement to qualify under the
to the appropriate staff or offices therein reorganization law for permanent
created. appointment as Deputy Register of Deeds II,
she cannot be reinstated to her former
The law mandates that from the moment an position without violating the express
implementing order is issued, all positions in mandate of the law.
the Land Registration Commission are Secretary of DOTC v. Mabalot; Feb. 27,
deemed non-existent. 2002; Buena, J.
R.A. No. 8043 entitled "An Act Establishing In 1986, the country also ratified the 1966
the Rules to Govern the Inter-Country International Covenant on Civil and Political
Adoption of Filipino Children and For Other Rights (ICCPR). Article 24 thereof provide
Purposes" (otherwise known as the "Inter- for the right of every child "to acquire a
Country Adoption Act of 1995"), R.A. No. nationality:"
8552, entitled "An Act Establishing the The common thread of the UDHR, UNCRC
Rules and Policies on the Adoption of and ICCPR is to obligate the Philippines to
Filipino Children and For Other Purposes" grant nationality from birth and ensure that
(otherwise known as the Domestic Adoption no child is stateless. This grant of nationality
Act of 1998) and the Court's A.M. No. 02-6- must be at the time of birth, and it cannot be
02-SC or the "Rule on Adoption," all accomplished by the application of our
expressly refer to "Filipino children" and present naturalization laws, Commonwealth
include foundlings as among Filipino Act No. 473, as amended, and R.A. No.
children who may be adopted. 9139, both of which require the applicant to
be at least eighteen years old.
International Law
WON petitioner’s repatriation in July 2006
Foundlings are likewise citizens under under the provisions of R.A. 9225 resulted in the
international law. Under the 1987 reacquisition of natural-born citizenship – YES.
Constitution, an international law can
become part of the sphere of domestic law Argument of COMELEC: Petitioner's
either by transformation or incorporation. repatriation in July 2006 under the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights provisions of R.A. No. 9225 did not result in
("UDHR") has been interpreted by this the reacquisition of natural-born citizenship.
It reasoned that since the applicant must The evidence of petitioner is overwhelming
perform an act, what is reacquired is not and taken together leads to no other
"natural-born" citizenship but only plain conclusion that she decided to permanently
"Philippine citizenship." abandon her U.S. residence and permanently
The COMELEC's rule arrogantly disregards relocate to the Philippines and actually re-
consistent jurisprudence on the matter of established her residence here on 24 May
repatriation statutes in general and of R.A. 2005. Indeed, coupled with her eventual
No. 9225 in particular. application to reacquire Philippine
o Bengson III v. HRET: Moreover, citizenship and her family's actual
repatriation results in the recovery continuous stay in the Philippines over the
of the original nationality… If he years, it is clear that when petitioner
was originally a natural-born citizen returned on 24 May 2005 it was for good.
before he lost his Philippine COMELEC ruled that petitioner's claim of
citizenship, he will be restored to his residence of 10 years and 11 months by 9
former status as a natural-born May 2016 in her 2015 COC was false
Filipino. because she put 6 years and 6 months as
"period of residence before May 13, 2013"
in her 2012 COC for Senator (so if we
follow her 2013 COC, she would have been
WON petitioner has satisfied the residency a resident for only 9 years in 2016).
requirement – YES. As explained by petitioner in her verified
pleadings, she misunderstood the date
When petitioner immigrated to the U.S. in required in the 2013 COC as the period of
1991, she lost her original domicile, which residence as of the day she submitted that
is the Philippines. There are three requisites COC in 2012. She said that she reckoned
to acquire a new domicile: (1) Residence or residency from April-May 2006 which was
bodily presence in a new locality; (2) An the period when the U.S. house was sold and
intention to remain there; and (3) an her husband returned to the Philippines. In
intention to abandon the old domicile. that regard, she was advised by her lawyers
To successfully effect a change of domicile, in 2015 that residence could be counted
one must demonstrate an actual removal or from 25 May 2005.
an actual change of domicile; a bona fide This explanation is bolstered by the change
intention of abandoning the former place of which the COMELEC itself introduced in
residence and establishing a new one and the 2015 COC which is now "period of
definite acts which correspond with the residence in the Philippines up to the day
purpose. In other words, there must basically before May 09, 2016." The COMELEC
be animus manendi coupled with animus would not have revised the query if it did
non revertendi. The purpose to remain in or not acknowledge that the first version was
at the domicile of choice must be for an vague.
indefinite period of time; the change of That petitioner could have reckoned
residence must be voluntary; and the residence from a date earlier than the sale of
residence at the place chosen for the new her U.S. house and the return of her husband
domicile must be actual. is plausible given the evidence that she had
Petitioner presented voluminous evidence returned a year before. Such evidence, to
showing that she and her family abandoned repeat, would include her passport and the
their U.S. domicile and relocated to the school records of her children.
Philippines for good (i.e sold house in US,
moved to PH, enrolled children in schools in
PH, registered as a voter) Rodriguez v. COMELEC; July 24, 1996;
Francisco, J.
Facts: governor. This time, Marquez challenged
Rodriguez' candidacy via petition for
Petitioner Eduardo T. Rodriguez and private
disqualification before the COMELEC, based
respondent Bienvenido O. Marquez, Jr.
principally on the same allegation that
(Rodriguez and Marquez, for brevity) were
Rodriguez is a "fugitive from justice." This
protagonists for the gubernatorial (candidates for
petition for disqualification (SPA No. 95-089)
governor of Quezon Province) post of Quezon
was filed by Marquez on April 11, 1995 when
Province in the May 1992 elections. Rodriguez
Rodriguez' petition for certiorari (112889) from
won and was proclaimed duly-elected governor.
where the April 18, 1995 MARQUEZ Decision
Marquez challenged Rodriguez victory via sprung was still then pending before the Court.
petition for quo warranto before the COMELEC
COMELEC, allegedly having kept in mind the
(EPC No. 92-28). Marquez revealed that
MARQUEZ Decision definition of "fugitive
Rodriguez left the United States where a charge,
from justice", found Rodriguez to be one. Such
filed on November 12, 1985, is pending against
finding was essentially based on Marquez'
the latter before the Los Angeles Municipal
documentary evidence consisting of
Court for fraudulent insurance claims, grand
theft and attempted grand theft of personal 1. an authenticated copy of the
property. Rodriguez is therefore a "fugitive from November 12, 1995 warrant of arrest
justice" which is a ground for his issued by the Los Angeles Municipal
disqualification/ineligibility under Section 40(e) Court against Rodriguez, and
of the Local Government Code (R.A. 7160), so
2. an authenticated copy of the felony
argued Marquez.
complaint
COMELEC dismissed Marquez quo warranto.
At any rate, Rodriguez again emerged as the
Marquez challenged the COMELEC dismissal
victorious candidate in the May 8, 1995 election
of EPC No. 92-28 before this Court via petition
for the position of governor.
for certiorari, docketed as G.R. No. 112889. The
crux of said petition is whether Rodriguez is a On May 10 and 11, 1995, Marquez filed urgent
"fugitive from justice" as contemplated by motions to suspend Rodriguez' proclamation
Section 40(e) of the Local Government Code which the COMELEC granted on May 11, 1995.
based on the alleged pendency of a criminal The Provincial Board of Canvassers nonetheless
charge against him. MARQUEZ Decision, proclaimed Rodriguez on May 12, 1995.
declared that: x x x, fugitive from justice
includes not only those who flee after conviction The COMELEC Consolidated Resolution
to avoid punishment but likewise those who, suspending Rodriguez' proclamation thus gave
after being charged, flee to avoid prosecution. rise to the filing of the instant petition for
This definition truly finds support from certiorari
jurisprudence (x x x), and it may be so conceded
as expressing the general and ordinary
connotation of the term." But Whether or not Issue:
Rodriguez is a "fugitive from justice" under the
WON Rodriguez is a fugitive of justice – NO
definition thus given was not passed upon by the
Court, thus remanded to COMELEC to resolve Ratio:
such. Court however denied a reconsideration of
the MARQUEZ Decision. A fugitive from justice includes not only
those who flee after conviction to avoid
May 8, 1995 election, Rodriguez and Marquez punishment but likewise those who, after
renewed their rivalry for the same position of being charged, flee to avoid prosecution.
The definition indicates that the intent to to depart therefrom at the precise time that
evade is the compelling factor that animates he did and to return to the Philippines.
one’s flight from a particular jurisdiction. Clearly, a person who is aware of the
And obviously, there can only be an intent imminent filing of charges against him or of
to evade prosecution or punishment when the same already filed in connection with
there is knowledge by the fleeing subject of acts he committed in the jurisdiction of a
an already instituted indictment, or of a particular state, is under an obligation not to
promulgated judgment of conviction. flee said place of commission.
Rodriguez’ case just cannot fit in this However, as in petitioner’s case, his
concept. There is no dispute that his arrival departure from the United States may not
in the Philippines from the US on June 25, place him under a similar obligation. His
1985, as per certifications issued by the subsequent knowledge while in the
Bureau of Immigrations dated April 27 and Philippines and non-submission to the
June 26 of 1995, preceded the filing of the jurisdiction of the former country does not
felony complaint in the Los Angeles Court operate to label petitioner automatically a
on November 12, 1985 and of the issuance fugitive from justice. As he was a public
on even date of the arrest warrant by that officer appointed and elected immediately
same foreign court, by almost five (5) after his return to the country, petitioner
months. Rodriguez had every reason to devote
It was clearly impossible for Rodriguez to utmost priority to the service of his office.
have known about such felony complaint He could not have gone back to the United
and arrest warrant at the time he left the US, States in the middle of his term nor could he
as there was in fact no complaint and arrest have traveled intermittently thereto without
warrant – much less conviction – to speak of jeopardizing the interest of the public he
yet at such time. serves. To require that of petitioner would
What prosecution or punishment then was be to put him in a paradoxical quandary
Rodriguez deliberately running away from where he is compelled to violate the very
with his departure from the US? The very functions of his office.
essence of being a “fugitive from justice”
under the MARQUEZ Decision definition,
is just nowhere to be found in the Lecaroz v. Sandiganbayan; March 25, 1999;
circumstances of Rodriguez. Bellosilio, J.
Petitioner was shown to have gone back to Facts: Petitioner Francisco M. Lecaroz was the
the country to fight against Marcos’ Municipal Mayor of Santa Cruz, Marinduque,
dictatorship and to serve as a governor.
while his son, his co-petitioner Lenlie Lecaroz,
o When, in good faith, a person leaves
was the outgoing chairman of the Kabataang
the territory of a state not his own,
homeward bound, and learns Barangay (KB) of Barangay Bagong Silang,
subsequently of charges filed Municipality of Santa Cruz, and concurrently a
against him while in the relative member of its Sangguniang Bayan (SB)
peace and service of his own representing the Federation of Kabataang
country, the fact that he does not Barangays.
subject himself to the jurisdiction of
the former state does not qualify In the 1985 election for the Kabataang Barangay
him outright as a fugitive from Jowil Red won as KB Chairman of Barangay
justice. Matalaba, Santa Cruz. Parenthetically, Lenlie
Lecaroz did not run as candidate in this electoral
exercise as he was no longer qualified for the
In the absence of intent to evade the laws of position after having already passed the age limit
the United States, petitioner had every right fixed by law
Red was appointed by then President Ferdinand Administration a confirmation of his
Marcos as member of the Sangguniang Bayan of appointment as KB Sectoral Representative to
Santa Cruz representing the KBs of the the Sanggunian Bayan of Santa Cruz.
municipality. Imee Marcos-Manotoc, then the
Red filed with the Office of the Ombudsman
National Chairperson of the organization, sent a
several criminal complaints against Mayor
telegram to Red confirming his appointment and
Francisco Lecaroz and Lenlie Lecaroz arising
advising him further that copies of his
from the refusal of the two officials to let him
appointment papers would be sent to him in due
assume the position of KB sectoral
time through the KB Regional Office. Red
representative. After preliminary investigation,
received the telegram on 2 January 1986 and
the Ombudsman filed with the Sandiganbayan
showed it immediately to Mayor Francisco M.
thirteen (13) Informations for estafa through
Lecaroz.
falsification of public documents against
Armed with the telegram and intent on assuming petitioners, and one (1) Information for violation
the position of sectoral representative of the KBs of Sec. 3, par. (e), of RA No. 3019, the Anti-
to the SB, Red attended the meeting of the Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, against Mayor
Sanggunian upon the invitation of one of its Lecaroz alone.
members, Kagawad Rogato Lumawig. In that
The Sandiganbayan found the 2 accused guilty
meeting, Mayor Francisco M. Lecaroz informed
on all counts of estafa, however, with respect to
Red that he could not yet sit as member of the
the violation of Sec. 3(e), of RA 3019, SB
municipal council until his appointment had
acquitted Francisco. It found that Red was
been cleared by the Governor of Marinduque.
neither authorized to sit as member of the SBay
Red finally received his appointment papers because he was not properly appointed thereto
sometime in January 1986. But it was only on 23 nor had he shown to the mayor sufficient basis
April 1986, when then President Corazon C. for his alleged right to a seat in the municipal
Aquino was already in power, that he forwarded council. Thus, Francisco was legally justified in
these documents to Mayor Lecaroz. This not allowing Red to assume the position of
notwithstanding, Red was still not allowed by Kagawad.
the mayor to sit as sectoral representative in the
Sanggunian. Issue:
WON Mayor Lecaroz erred in not allowing Red
Meanwhile, Mayor Lecaroz prepared and
to assume his position – NO
approved on different dates the payment to
Lenlie Lecaroz of twenty-six (26) sets of Ratio:
payrolls for the twenty-six (26) quincenas
covering the period 16 January 1986 to 30 The basic propositions upon which the
January 1987. Lenlie Lecaroz signed the payroll Sandiganbayan premised its conviction of
for 1-15 January 1986 and then authorized the accused are: (a) although Red was duly
someone else to sign all the other payrolls for elected KB Chairman he could not validly
assume a seat in the Sanggunian as KB
the succeeding quincenas and claim the
sectoral representative for failure to show a
corresponding salaries in his behalf. valid appointment; and, (b) Lenlie who was
the incumbent KB representative could not
hold over after his term expired because
On 25 October 1989, or three (3) years and nine pertinent laws do not provide for holdover.
(9) months from the date he received his Petitioner argument: Red failed to qualify as
appointment papers from President Marcos, Red KB sectoral representative since he did not
was finally able to secure from the Aquino present an authenticated copy of his
appointment papers; neither did he take a satisfied the prerequisite of oath that his
valid oath of office. Resultantly, this enabled right to enter into the position becomes
Lenlie to continue as member of the SB plenary and complete. Until then, he has
although in a holdover capacity since his none at all. And for as long as he has not
term had already expired. qualified, the holdover officer is the rightful
The concept of holdover when applied to a occupant.
public officer implies that the office has a Thus, since Red never qualified for the post,
fixed term and the incumbent is holding Lenlie remained KB representative, albeit in
onto the succeeding term. It is usually a holdover capacity, and was in every aspect
provided by law that officers elected or a de jure officer, or at least a de facto officer
appointed for a fixed term shall remain in entitled to receive the salaries and all the
office not only for that term but until their emoluments appertaining to the position. As
successors have been elected and qualified such, he could not be considered an intruder
The law abhors a vacuum in public offices, and liable for encroachment of public office.
and courts generally indulge in the strong
presumption against a legislative intent to WON Petitioners should be held liable for estafa
create, by statute, a condition which may – NO
result in an executive or administrative
office becoming, for any period of time, When Red showed up at the Sanggunuan
wholly vacant or unoccupied by one meeting, what he presented to Mayor
lawfully authorized to exercise its functions. Francisco was a mere telegram sent by Imee
This is founded on obvious considerations of informing him of his supposed appointment,
public policy, for the principle of holdover is together with a photocopy of a "Mass
specifically intended to prevent public Appointment." Without authenticated copies
convenience from suffering because of a of the appointment papers, Red had no right
vacancy and to avoid a hiatus in the to assume office, and Francisco had every
performance of government functions. right to withhold recognition.
Sandiganbayan: by taking his oath of office Although Red received his appointment
before Reyes in 1985, Red validly assumed papers signed by Pres. Marcos in January
the KB presidency upon the expiration of 1986, he forwarded the same to Mayor
the term of Lenlie. Francisco only on 23 April 1986 during
However, under the provisions of the which time Marcos had already been
Administrative Code then in force, deposed and Aquino had already taken over.
specifically Sec. 21, Art. VI, members of the On 25 March 1986 the Freedom
then Batasang Pambansa were not Constitution came into being providing in
authorized to administer oaths. It was only Sec. 2 of Art. III thereof that –
after the approval of RA No. 6733 on 25 o Sec. 2. All elective and
July 1989 and its subsequent publication in a appointive officials and
newspaper of general circulation that employees under the 1973
members of both Houses of Congress were Constitution shall continue in
vested for the first time with the general office until otherwise provided
authority to administer oaths. Clearly, the by proclamation or executive
oath taken by Red before a member of the order or upon the designation of
Batasang Pambansa who had no authority to their successors if such
administer oaths, was invalid and amounted appointment is made within a
to no oath at all. period of one (1) year from
To be sure, an oath of office is a qualifying February 26, 1986.
requirement for a public office; a Duty bound to observe the constitutional
prerequisite to the full investiture with the mandate, Francisco through the provincial
office. Only when the public officer has governor forwarded the papers of Red to
then Minister of Interior and Local
Government Pimentel, Jr., requesting advice For the offense to be established, the
on the validity of the appointment signed by following elements must concur: (a) the
Marcos. offender makes in a document
In ascribing malice and bad faith, SB cited 2 statements in a narration of facts; (b) the
circumstances which purportedly indicated offender has a legal obligation to
criminal intent. It pointed out that Lenlie disclose the truth of the facts narrated;
was not in the municipal payroll for the first (c) the facts narrated by the offender are
quincena of 1986 which meant that his term absolutely false; and, (d) the perversion
had finally ended, and that the reinstatement of truth in the narration of facts was
of Lenlie by Francisco in the payroll periods made with the wrongful intent of
from 15 January 1986 and thereafter for the injuring a third person.
next 12 -1/2 months was for no other The 1st and 3rd elements of the offense
purpose than to enable him to draw salaries have not been established in this case. In
from the municipality. approving the payment of salaries to
There is however no evidence, documentary Lenlie, Francisco signed uniformly-
or otherwise, that Francisco himself caused worded certifications thus –
the name of Lenlie to be dropped from the o I hereby certify on my official
payroll for the first quincena of January oath that the above payroll is
1986. On the contrary, it is significant that correct, and that the services
while Lenlie’s name did not appear in the above stated have been duly
payroll for the first quincena, yet, in the rendered. Payment for such
payroll for the next quincena Lenlie was services is also hereby approved
paid for both the first and second quincenas, from the appropriations
and not merely for the second half of the indicated.
month which would have been the case if he When Francisco certified to the
was actually "dropped" from the payroll for correctness of the payroll, he was
the first 15 days and then "reinstated" in the making not a narration of facts but a
succeeding payroll period, as held by the conclusion of law expressing his belief
court a quo. that Lenlie was legally holding over as
From all indications, it is possible that the member of the Sanggunian and thus
omission was due to the inadequate entitled to the emoluments attached to
documentation of Red's appointment to and the position. This is an opinion
assumption of office, or the result of a mere undoubtedly involving a legal matter,
clerical error which was later rectified in the and any "misrepresentation" of this kind
succeeding payroll. This however cannot be cannot constitute the crime of false
confirmed by the evidence at hand. But pretenses.
since a doubt is now created about the These are not legally acceptable indicia,
import of such omission, the principle of for they are the very same acts alleged
equipoise should properly apply. This rule in the Informations as constituting the
demands that all reasonable doubt intended crime of estafa through falsification.
to demonstrate error and not a crime should They cannot qualify as proof of
be resolved in favor of the accused. If the complicity or unity of criminal intent.
inculpatory facts and circumstances are Conspiracy must be established
capable of two or more explanations, one of separately from the crime itself and
which is consistent with the innocence of the must meet the same degree of proof, i.e.,
accused and the other with his guilt, then the proof beyond reasonable doubt. While
evidence does not fulfill the test of moral conspiracy need not be established by
certainty and is not sufficient to support a direct evidence, for it may be inferred
conviction from the conduct of the accused before,
during and after the commission of the
crime, all taken together however, the Accordingly, on October 23, 1997, NHA
evidence must reasonably be strong Resident Auditor Salvador J. Vasquez issued
enough to show community of criminal Notice of Disallowance, disallowing in audit the
design. payment of representation allowances and per
Perhaps subliminally aware of the diems of "Cabinet members who were the ex-
paucity of evidence to support it, and if officio members of the NHA Board of Directors
only to buttress its finding of and/or their respective alternates who actually
conspiracy, the Sandiganbayan stressed
received the payments." The total disallowed
that the two accused are father and son.
Granting that this is not even ad amount of P276,600 paid as representation
hominem, we are unaware of any allowances and per diems to each of the
presumption in law that a conspiracy petitioners.
exists simply because the conspirators
Petitioners, through then Chairman Dionisio C.
are father and son or related by blood.
Dela Serna of the NHA Board of Directors,
DISQUALIFICATIONS appealed from the Notice of Disallowance to the
COA, on ground that 1. constitutional ban
Dela Cruz v COA; November 29, 2001; against dual or multiple positions applies only to
Sandoval-Gutierrez, J. the members of the Cabinet, their deputies or
assistants. It does not cover other appointive
Facts:
officials with equivalent rank or those lower
Petitioners, numbering 20, were members of the than the position of Assistant Secretary; and 2.
Board of Directors of the National Housing The NHA Directors are not Secretaries,
Authority (NHA) from 1991 to 1996. Undersecretaries or Assistant Secretaries and
that they occupy positions lower than the
On September 19, 1997, the COA issued position of Assistant Secretary. COA denied
Memorandum No. 97-038 directing all unit appeal.
heads of the government agencies and GOCCs
which have effected payment of any form of Issue:
additional compensation or remuneration to
WON Notice of disallowance should apply to
cabinet secretaries, their deputies and assistants,
petitioners Board of Directors - Yes
or their representatives, in violation of the rule
on multiple positions, to (a) immediately cause Presidential Decree No. 757 is the law
the disallowance of such additional "Creating the National Housing Authority
compensation or remuneration given to and and dissolving the existing housing agencies,
received by the concerned officials, and (b) defining its powers and functions, providing
effect the refund of the same from the time of funds therefor, and for other purposes."
the finality of the Supreme Court in the o SEC. 7. Board of Directors. - The
consolidated cases of Civil Liberties Union vs. Authority shall be governed by a
Board of Directors, hereinafter
Exexcutive Secretary and Anti-Graft League of
referred to as the Board, which shall
the Philippines, Inc. et al. vs. Secretary of
be composed of the Secretary of
Agrarian Reform, et al., promulgated on Public Works, Transportation and
February 22, 1991., which declared EO 284 Communication, the Director-
unconstitutional insofar as it allows Cabinet General of the National Economic
members, their deputies and assistants to hold and Development Authority, the
other offices, in addition to their primary offices, Secretary of Finance, the Secretary
and to receive compensation therefor. of Labor, the Secretary of Industry,
the Executive Secretary and the
General Manager of the
Authority. From among the has no right to receive additional
members, the President will appoint compensation for his services in the said
a chairman. The members of the position. The reason is that these services
Board may have their respective are already paid for and covered by the
alternates who shall be the officials compensation attached to his principal
next in rank to them and whose acts office.
shall be considered the acts of their Since the Executive Department Secretaries,
principals with the right to receive as ex-oficio members of the NHA Board, are
their benefit: Provided, that in the prohibited from receiving extra (additional)
absence of the Chairman, the Board compensation, whether it be in the form of a
shall elect a temporary presiding per diem or an honorarium or an allowance,
officer. or some other such euphemism," it follows
Under the above provisions, the persons that petitioners who sit as their alternates
mandated by law to sit as members of the cannot likewise be entitled to receive such
NHA Board are the following: (1) the compensation. A contrary rule would give
Secretary of Public Works, Transportation petitioners a better right than their principal.
and Communications, (2) the Director- Abeto v. Garceza; December 29, 1995;
General of the National Economic and Davide, J.
Development Authority, (3) the Secretary of
Finance, (4) the Secretary of Labor, (5) the Facts:
Secretary of Industry, (6) the Executive
Abeto charges Garceza with having
Secretary, and (7) the General Manager of the
NHA. While petitioners are not among those misrepresented himself as a full-fledged lawyer
officers, however, they are alternates of the and having acted as one of the authorized
said officers, whose acts shall be considered representatives of the complainant and his co-
the acts of their principals. complainants in labor cases filed the NLRC
To reiterate, the prohibition under Section despite the fact that he is a court employee.
13, Article VII is not to be interpreted as (stenographic reporter)
covering positions held without additional
compensation in ex-officio capacities as Respondent admits having assisted the
provided by law and as required by the complainants in the aforementioned labor cases;
primary functions of the concerned officials denies having misrepresented himself as a
office. lawyer. According to him, when he first met
The term ex-officio means from office; by complainant Abeto in December 1986, he
virtue of office. It refers to an authority frankly informed the latter that he is only a court
derived from official character merely, not employee and that he is only assisting or helping
expressly conferred upon the individual Mr. Arturo Ronquillo, for at that time no lawyer
character, but rather annexed to the official dared to assist the complainants in filing their
position. cases. This Arturo Ronquillo is the Vice
Ex-officio likewise denotes an act done in President of the Workers Amalgamated Union
an official character, or as a consequence of of the Philippines (WAUP) whose assistance
office, and without any other appointment or
was sought by complainant Abeto and the other
authority than that conferred by the office.
complainants in the labor cases for the filing and
An ex-officio member of a board is one who
is a member by virtue of his title to a certain prosecution of their cases. The respondent
office, and without further warrant or further alleges that the instant complaint arose
appointment. out of ill-feeling and is designed to malign and
The ex-officio position being actually and in destroy his name and reputation as a court
legal contemplation part of the principal employee.
office, it follows that the official concerned
Deputy Court Administrator submitted a Ratio:
memorandum recommending that the complaint
against the respondent for misrepresentation be Garcesa admitted having given or extended
dismissed, but that he be advised to heed the "casual assistance" to Mr. Arturo Ronquillo
Civil Service Rules and this Court's in the filing and prosecution of the said
memorandum circular prohibiting government cases. His justification therefor was to help
employees from engaging in any private the poor and downtrodden workers of
BISCOM Central — will not absolve him
business, vocation, or profession without
from administrative liability for the violation
permission from this Court. of Section 12, Rule XVIII of the Revised
Deputy Court Administrator submitted a Civil Service Rules and in Administrative
Memorandum, duly approved by the Court Circular No. 5
Administrator, wherein she made the following He could not, however, be liable for
findings and conclusion: unauthorized practice of law, since there is
It is worth mentioning here Sec. 12, no convincing evidence that he
Rule XVIII of the Revised Civil Service misrepresented himself as a lawyer.
Rules which provides that: Moreover, his appearance was in his
Sec. 12. No officer or employee shall capacity as one of the representatives of the
engage directly in any private business, complainants in the labor cases and not as a
vocation, or profession or be connected lawyer. Under Section 6, Rule IV of the
with any commercial, credit, agricultural Revised Rules of Procedure of the NLRC in
or industrial undertaking without a force at that time, a non-lawyer may appear
written permission from the head of before the NLRC or any Labor Arbiter if he
Department: Provided, That this represents himself as a party to the case,
prohibition will be absolute in the case represents an organization or its members,
of those officers and employees whose or is a duly accredited member of a free
duties and responsibilities require that legal aid staff of the Department of Labor
their entire time be at the disposal of the and Employment or of any other legal aid
Government office accredited by the Department of
Moreover in Administrative Circular No. 5 dated Justice or the Integrated Bar of the
4 October 1988 the Court expressed the view Philippines.
that: The entire time of Judiciary officials and Neither could he be liable under
employees must be devoted to government Memorandum Circular No. 17 dated 4
service to insure efficient and speedy September 1986 of the Office of the
administration of justice considering the express President declaring that the authority to
prohibition in the Rules of Court and the nature grant permission to any official or employee
of their work which requires them to serve with to engage in outside activities shall be
the highest degree of efficiency and granted by the head of the ministry
responsibility, in order to maintain public (department) or agency in accordance with
confidence in the Judiciary. Section 12, Rule XVIII of the Revised Civil
Service Rules. Said Memorandum Circular
These circumstances obtaining, we believe that No. 17 was declared by this Court
the stenographer Garcesa merits at the very least inapplicable to officials or employees of the
a reprimand for engaging in a limited law courts
practice.
At the time of her appointment, private We have consistently applied the doctrine in
respondent was then holding the position of Luego v. CSC in many cases with similar
Clerk II, Division of City Schools of San Pablo factual circumstances, but we see no
City. From August 25, 1976 to September 1983, compelling reason to apply the same in the
she was designated as Assistant to the Supply instant case. In the cases cited above, We
Officer. The Civil Service Regional Office IV ruled that the CSC has no authority to
revoke an appointment simply because it
approved her appointment as permanent
(CSC) believed that another person is better
"provided that there is no pending administrative
qualified than the appointee for it would
case against the appointee, no pending protest constitute an encroachment on the discretion
against the appointment, nor any decision by solely vested on the appointing authority.
competent authority that will adversely affect The situation is different as in the instant
the approval of (the) appointment" case, where the CSC revoked the
appointment of the successful protestant,
One month after, petitioner filed a protest with
petitioner herein, principally because the
the DECS Secretary questioning the
right to security of tenure of the prior previously approved appointment
appointee, private respondent herein, to the considering that she meets the prescribed
contested position had already attached qualification standards required of the
It must be noted that public respondent CSC position of Supply Officer I and the
did not direct the appointment of a substitute appropriate civil service eligibility, to wit:
of its choice. It merely restored the o EDUCATION: Bachelor's degree
appointment of private respondent who was with training in Supply Management
first appointed to the contested position. o EXPERIENCE: None required
o ELIGIBILITY: Supply Officer;
Career Service (Professional)
The records show that private respondent It is well-settled that once an appointment is
was issued a permanent appointment on issued and the moment the appointee
September 19, 1986 as Supply Officer I in assumes a position in the civil service under
the DECS Division of San Pablo City a completed appointment, he acquires a
effective September 30, 1986. legal, not merely equitable right (to the
o On the basis of the of said position), which is protected not only by
appointment which was approved by statute, but also by the Constitution, and
the Civil Service Regional Office cannot be taken away from him either by
No. IV, private respondent assumed revocation of the appointment, or by
and performed the duties and removal, except for cause, and with previous
functions of the position as Supply notice and hearing
Officer I and received the There is thus reasonable ground for the rule
compensation and benefits of the that the moment the discretionary power of
said position in accordance with the appointment has been exercised and the
mandate of Section 9 par.(h) of the appointee assumed the duties and functions
Civil Service Law. of the position, the said appointment cannot
o In consonance with the doctrine laid be revoked by the appointing authority on
down in Villanueva v. Balallo, that the ground merely that the protestant is more
an appointment is complete when qualified than the first appointee, subject
the last act required of the however to the condition that the first
appointing power has been appointee should possess the minimum
performed, but later qualified in qualifications required by law.
Favis v. Rupisan, that the acts of the Otherwise, the security of tenure guaranteed
head of a department or office by Article IX-B, Section 2 par. (3) of the
making the appointment and the 1987 Constitution would be rendered
Commissioner of Civil Service meaningless if the appointing authority is
acting together, though not allowed to flip-flop in exercising its
concurrently, but consecutively, are discretionary power of appointment.
necessary to make an appointment We have defined the concept of "for cause"
complete, the permanent in connection with removal of public
appointment extended to private officers in the case of De los Santos v.
respondent, under the circumstances Mallare, as follows: "It means for reasons
of the case, is deemed complete. As which the law and sound public policy
such, she is entitled to the protection recognized as sufficient warrant for removal,
of the law against unjust removal. that is legal cause, and not merely causes
which the appointing power in the exercise
The conclusion of respondent Commission of discretion may deem sufficient.
in the questioned decision that private It is implied that officers may not be
respondent is more qualified than petitioner removed at the mere will of those vested
merely supports the validity of the with the power of removal, or without any
restoration of private respondent to her
cause. Moreover, the cause must relate to qualified for and began to exercise the duties
and affect the administration of the office, and functions of the position.
and must be restricted to something of a
substantial nature directly affecting the On June 1, 1950, Gil R. Mallare was extended
rights and interests of the public." an ad interim appointment by the President to
The ground relied upon by petitioner in his the same position, after which, on June 3, the
protest that he is more qualified than private Undersecretary of the Department of Public
respondent in terms of education, experience Works and Communications directed Santos to
and training does not fall within the meaning report to the Bureau of Public Works for another
of "for cause" contemplated by Article IX- assignment. Santos refused to vacate the office,
B, Section 2 par. (3) of the 1987 and when the City Mayor and the other officials
Constitution which would warrant the named as Mallare's co-defendants ignored him
revocation, if not removal, of the
and paid Mallare the salary corresponding to the
appointment of private respondent. Neither
position, he commenced a quo warranto
does it fall under the grounds of appeal
contemplated under Section 19 par. (6) of questioning the legality of the appointment of
the Civil Service Law (P.D. 807). Therefore, respondent Gil R. Mallare to the office of city
the protest of petitioner did not adversely engineer.
affect the approval of the appointment of
Issue:
private respondent
Even on the assumption that the revocation WON The removal of Petitioner Santos was
of private respondent's appointment was legal –
validly exercised by DECS Secretary
Quisumbing, still the appointment extended Ratio:
to petitioner was tainted with irregularity as
it was issued before the finality of the Petitioner: Under the Constitution he cannot
decision on the protest in violation of CSC be removed against his will and without
Resolution No. 83-343 which prohibits the cause. Article XII of the Constitution,
issuance of an appointment to protestant section 4 of which reads: “No officer or
(petitioner) if the protest case is not yet employee in the Civil Service shall be
finally resolved, since there is no vacancy in removed or suspended except for cause as
the position pending resolution of the protest provided by law.”
case.
There can be no appointment to a non- The City Engineer of Baguio "belongs to the
vacant position. unclassified service."
The incumbent must first be legally Lacson v Romero (J. Montemayor): Officers
removed or his appointment validly or employees in the unclassified as well as
terminated. An appointment to an office those in the classified service are protected
which is not vacant is null and void ab initio. by the above-cited provision of the organic
law
De Los Santos v. Mallare; August 31, 1950; o However, there is this difference
Tuazon, J. between the Lacson case and the
case at bar: Section 2545 of the
Facts: Revised Administrative Code,
which falls under Chapter 61
Eduardo de los Santos, the petitioner, was entitled "City of Baguio," authorizes
appointed City Engineer of Baguio on July 16, the Governor General (now the
1946, by the President, appointment which was President) to remove at pleasure any
confirmed by the Commission on Appointments of the officers enumerated therein,
on August 6, and on the 23rd of that month, he one of whom is the city engineer.
rights and interests of the
Is this provision still in force? public."(43 Am. Jur., 47, 48.)
Reconsideration of the decision in Lacson
Section 2 of Article XVI of the Constitution vs. Romero as far as officers in the
declares that "All laws of the Philippine unclassified service are concerned is urged.
Islands shall continue in force until the It is contended that only officers and
inauguration of the Commonwealth of the employees in the classified service should be
Philippines; thereafter, such laws shall brought within the purview of Article XII of
remain operative, unless inconsistent with the Constitution.
this Constitution, until amended, altered, Article XII, Section 1: “A Civil Service
modified, or repealed by the Congress of the embracing all branches and subdivisions of
Philippines, . . . ." the Government shall be provided by law.
It seems plain beyond doubt that the Appointments in the Civil Service, except as
provision of section 2545 of the Revised those which are policy-determining,
Administrative Code, he (Governor-General primarily confidential or highly technical in
now President) may remove at pleasure any nature, shall be made only according to
of the said appointive officers," is merit and fitness, to be determined as far as
incompatible with the constitutional practicable by competitive examination.”
inhibition that "No officer or employee in The first clause is a definition of the scope
the Civil Service shall be removed or of Civil Service, the men and women which
suspended except for cause as provided by section 4 protects.
law." The two provisions are mutually It seems obvious from that definition that
repugnant and absolutely irreconcilable. One the entire Civil Service is contemplated,
in express terms permits what the other in except positions "which are policy-
similar terms prohibits. determining, primarily confidential or highly
The Constitution leaves it to the Congress to technical in nature.
provide for the cause of removal, and it is o Theory is confirmed by the
suggested that the President's pleasure is enactment of Commonwealth Act
itself a cause No. 177 on November 30, 1936 to
o The phrase "for cause" in implement Article XII of the
connection with the removals of Constitution.
public officers has acquired a o CA No. 177: Explains Civil Service
well-defined concept: "It means almost in the identical words of that
for reasons which the law and article of the organic law. As a
sound public policy recognized contemporaneous construction, this
as sufficient warrant for Act affords an index to the meaning
removal, that is, legal cause, and of Civil Service as conceived by the
not merely causes which the framers of the Constitution. "
appointing power in the exercise o The principle of contemporaneous
of discretion may deem construction may be applied to the
sufficient. It is implied that construction given by the legislature
officers may not be removed at to the constitutional provisions
the mere will of those vested dealing with legislative powers and
with the power of removal, or procedure. Though not conclusive,
without any cause. Moreover, such interpretation is generally
the cause must relate to and conceded as being entitled to great
affect the administration of the weight."
office, and must be restricted to We are led to the same conclusion by the
something of a substantial existing provisions at the time of the
nature directly affecting the adoption of the Constitution. Civil Service
as embracing both classes of officers and unsound even if the case be approached
employees possessed definite legal and from this angle. It contains its own
statutory meaning when the Constitution refutation. The Constitution and the law
was approved. implementing it afford adequate safeguards
Section 670 of the Revised Administrative against such consequences as have been
Code already provided that "Persons in the painted.
Philippine civil service pertain either to the The argument proceeds, contrary to its
classified service," and went on to say that context, on the assumption that removals of
"The classified service embraces all not civil service officers and employees are
expressly declared to be in the unclassified absolutely prohibited, which is not the case.
service." Then section 671 described The Constitution authorizes removals and
persons in the unclassified service as only requires that they be for cause. And the
"officers, other than the provincial treasurers occasions for removal would be greatly
and assistant directors of bureaus or offices, diminished if the injunction of section 1 of
appointed by the President of the Article XII of the Constitution — that
Philippines, with the consent of the appointments in the civil service shall be
Commission on Appointments of the made only according to merit and fitness, to
National Assembly, and all other officers of be determined as far as practicable by
the government whose appointments are by competitive examination — would be
law vested in the President of the adhered of meticulously in the first place.
Philippines alone." Three specified classes of positions —
The rules of the construction inform us that policy-determining, primarily confidential
the words used in the constitution are to be and highly technical — are excluded from
given the sense they have in common use. It the merit system and dismissal at pleasure of
has been said that we must look to the officers and employees appointed therein is
history of the times, examine the state of allowed by the Constitution. These positions
things existing when the Constitution was involved the highest degree of confidence,
framed and adopted, and interpret it in the or are closely bound out with and dependent
light of the law then in operation. on other positions to which they are
Attention is drawn to supposed subordinate, or are temporary in nature. It
inconveniences of tying the hands of the may truly be said that the good of the
appointing power in changing and shifting service itself demands that appointments
officers in the unclassified service. coming under this category determinable at
"If — it is argued — all important officers the will of the officer that makes them.
and employees of the government falling
within the unclassified service as The office of city engineer is neither primarily
enumerated in section 671 of the Revised confidential, policy-determining, nor highly
Administrative Code as amended by technical.
Commonwealth Act No. 177, may not be
removed by the President except for cause Every appointment implies confidence, but
as provided by law, . . . the President would much more than ordinary confidence is
be seriously crippled in the discharge of the reposed in the occupant of a position that is
grave duty and responsibility laid upon him primarily confidential. The latter phrase
by the Constitution to take care that the laws denotes not only confidence in the aptitude
faithfully executed." of the appointee for the duties of the office
Questions of expediency are, of course, but primarily close intimacy which insures
beyond the province of the court to take into freedom of intercourse without
account in the interpretation of laws or of embarrassment or freedom from misgivings
the Constitution where the language is of betrayals of personal trust or confidential
otherwise clear. But the argument is matters of state.
Nor is the position of city engineer policy- appointment under section 2545 of the
determining. A city engineer does not Revised Administrative Code, the petitioner
formulate a method of action for the must be deemed to have accepted the
government or any its subdivisions. His job conditions and limitations attached to the
is to execute policy, not to make it. With appointment. If the clause of section 2545
specific reference to the City Engineer of which authorized the President to remove
Baguio, his powers and duties are carefully officers of the City of Baguio at pleasure
laid down for him be section 2557 of the had been abrogated when petitioner's
Revised Administrative Code and are appointment was issued, the appointee
essentially ministerial in character. cannot presumed to have abided by this
Finally, the position of city engineer is condition.
technical but not highly so. A city engineer
is not required nor is he supposed to possess
a technical skill or training in the supreme or Tria v. Sto Tomas; July 31, 1991; Feleciano,
superior degree, which is the sense in which J.
"highly technical" is, we believe, employed Facts:
in the Constitution. There are hundreds of
technical men in the classified civil service Petitioner Rogelio A. Tria had been employed
whose technical competence is not lower with the Bureau of Intelligence and Investigation
than that of a city engineer. As a matter of later renamed Finance Ministry Intelligence
fact, the duties of a city engineer are Bureau (FMIB) now known as the Economic
eminently administrative in character and Intelligence and Investigation Bureau (EIIB) of
could very well be discharged by non-
the Department of Finance, as a Management
technical men possessing executive ability.
and Audit Analyst I, a position expressly
We are not declaring any part of section
2545 of the Revised Administrative Code described in the letter of appointment as
unconstitutional. "confidential." The appointment was signed by
What we declare is that the particular Pelagio A. Cruz, Lieutenant General, AFP (Ret)
provision thereof which gave the Chief Commissioner, FMIBI."
Executive power to remove officers at
Petitioner wrote a confidential report to the
pleasure has been repealed by the
FMIB Deputy Commissioner detailing the
Constitution and ceased to be operative from
the time that instrument went into effect. nonfeasance of a FMIB lawyer assigned to
A law that has been repealed is as good as if Region 5.
it had never been enacted, and cannot, in the Petitioner's report recommended the lawyer's
nature of things, contravene or pretend to replacement "With a competent and able lawyer
contravene constitutional inhibition. So,
to handle the cases brought to his attention." On
unlike legislation that is passed in defiance
of the Constitution, assertive and menacing, 14 October 1986, petitioner submitted another
the questioned part of section 2545 of the confidential report, addressed to the Deputy
Revised Administrative Code does not need Executive Secretary, Office of the President, this
a positive declaration of nullity by the court time concerning Col. Jackson P. Alparce (Ret.).
to put it out of the way. To all intents and FMIB Region 5 Director.
purposes, it is non-existent, outlawed and
eliminated from the statute book by the Tria filed an application for vacation leave for
Constitution itself by express mandate 100 working days, covering the period 1
before this petitioner was appointed. November 1986 to 30 April 1987. He sought to
take advantage of a Civil Service circular which
allows employees who propose to seek interim
Incidentally, the last discussion answers and employment abroad, to go on prolonged leave of
disposes of the proposition that in accepting
absence without pay without being considered November 1986 for continuous absence without
separated from the service. The application was official leave and for loss of confidence."
approved by his immediate supervisor and
It was upon his return to the country in May
Chief, Intelligence and Investigation Service,
1987 that Tria came to know of the
Col. Ruperto Amistoso (Ret.), and the personnel
abovementioned Letter-Order and of the two
officer, Col. Domingo Rodriguez (Ret.), both
Memoranda. In a letter to respondent Almonte,
based in the Region 5 office of the FMIB.
Tria asked for reinstatement, stating that his
When Tria was already in Manila attending to application for vacation leave had been
the processing of his travel papers, a approved by his immediate chief and the
Memorandum was sent to him in Legaspi City personnel officer.- Denied by Rabina
from the FMIB Central Office in Quezon City
Tria then filed a petition for review with prayer
by respondent Assistant FMIB Commissioner
for reinstatement and backwages before
Brig. Gen. Miguel Villamor (Ret.), referring to
respondent CSC which it denied. |CSC| the grant
the confidential report sent out to the Office of
of Tria's application for vacation leave,
the President. The Memorandum in part stated:
notwithstanding the accumulation of sufficient
As an agent of FMIB, it is inherent in leave credits, was discretionary on the part of
your duties to report to the Rabina, the approving official
Commissioner or other authorities of
FMIB of any irregularity committed by Issue:
employees/officials in that Region to WON an employee holding a position
enable them to take appropriate considered as primarily confidential may be
action/investigation and/or disciplinary dismissed on grounds of loss of confidence by
action. the appointing authority on the basis of the
employee's having gone on unauthorized leave
However, you opted to submit report
of absence and of his having filed a confidential
directly to the Office of the President,
report on one of his superiors directly with the
which adversely affected the Bureau's
Office of the President. – NO
image and placed the Commissioner in
an embarrasing position. We begin with the proposition that the
effects of characterizing a position as
In view thereof, you are required to
"primarily confidential" are two-fold:
submit your explanation in writing
o firstly, such characterization renders
within 5 working days from receipt why inapplicable the ordinary
no disciplinary action should be taken requirement of filling up a position
against you for non-compliance with in the Civil Service on the basis of
office rules merit and fitness as determined by
competitive examinations; and
o secondly, while the 1987
Tria, however, had already left the country and Constitution does not exempt such
was unable to comply with the express directives positions from the operation of the
principle set out in Article IX (B),
of the second Memorandum. He was therefore
Section 2 (3) of the same
considered to be on AWOL. This prolonged
Constitution that "no officer or
absence, as well as his failure to explain his employee of the Civil Service shall
sending out the confidential report, prompted be removed or suspended except for
respondent EIIB Commissioner Brig Gen. Jose cause provided by law," the "cause
Almonte (Ret.) to issue a letter informing Tria of
the termination of his services retroactive to "1
provided by law" includes "loss of The actual duties and functions of Tria as a
confidence.” "Management and Audit Analyst I" in the
It is said to be a settled rule that those FMIB, as set out in the job description of
holding primarily confidential positions that position, one is struck by the ordinary
"continue for so long as confidence in them and day to day character of such duties and
endures. Their termination can be justified functions:
on the ground of loss of confidence because o Prepares required survey materials,
in that case their cessation from office work plans and schedules; gathers
involves no removal but the expiration of data and makes investigations and
their term of office. Notwithstanding the analyzes (sic) of administrative
refined distinction between removal from problems relating to organization,
office and expiration of the term of a public personnel and procedure;
officer, the net result is loss of tenure upon supplements data gathered by
loss of confidence on the part of the interviewing heads of office or
appointing power. private individuals or by observing
A position in the Civil Service may be actual operations; examines and
considered primarily confidential: analyzes reorganization proposals in
(1) when the President of the the light gathered and facts
Philippines, upon recommendation of observed; analyzes causes of
the Civil Service Commission, has inefficiency or lack of economy,
declared that position to be primarily undertakes required study and
confidential; or research; prepares survey reports
and write (sic) drafts of tentative
(2) when the position, given the organization plans, discusses and
character of the duties and functions justifies such plans to supervisor
attached to it, is primarily confidential in and appropriate bodies; maintains
nature. close liaison work with head of
offices or organizations studies
All positions in the EIIB were apparently operational methods and procedures
declared as "highly confidential" by former of the organization to simplify the
President Marcos in Letter of work and improve efficiency;
Implementation No. 71, dated 4 September studies and recommends measures
1978, which reads in part as follows to insure industrial safety and
Pursuant to PD1458, dated June 11, 1978, prevention of accidents; supervises
and letter dated August 18, 1978 of the the installation of management
President/Prime Minister creating the control devices; assists in the
Bureau of Intelligence and Investigation compilation, analysis and
(BII) [now the EIIB], the following interpretation of important statistics
directives are hereby issued for immediate for use of management.
implementation by the new Bureau: The positions which this Court has in the
4. The Commissioner of the BII with the past characterized as "primarily
approval of the Ministry of Finance, is confidential" include: private secretaries of
hereby instructed to organize and public functionaries; a security officer
appoint his staff . . . All positions in the assigned as bodyguard of the person of a
BII are highly confidential in nature and public officer and responsible for taking
security measures for the safety of such
incumbents thereof may be removed for
official, City Legal Officer of Davao City
loss of confidence by appropriate vis-a-vis the Davao City Mayor; Provincial
authority. Attorney of Iloilo Province vis-a-vis the
Governor of Iloilo Province. It is also
instructive to refer to some of the positions
which the Court has refused to designate as o In the case at bar, the EIIB issued a
"primarily confidential:" e.g., members of Memorandum to Tria, after he was
the Customs Police Force or Port Patrol; already in Manila, requiring him to
Special Assistant to the Governor of the explain why no disciplinary action
Central Bank, in charge of the Export should be taken against him, which
Department; Senior Executive Assistant, Memorandum was not received by
Clerk I and Supervising Clerk I and Tria. However, after his return from
stenographer in the Office of the President. abroad and upon request of Tria,
The duties of Tria related to the study and another investigation was conducted
analysis of organizational structures and by the EIIB where Tria had an
procedures, with the end in view of making opportunity to explain his side of the
recommendations designed to increase the matter. The Court considers that the
levels of efficiency and coordination within subsequent investigation constituted
the organization so analyzed. substantial compliance with the
Moreover, the modest rank and fungible demands of procedural due process.
nature of the position occupied by Tria, is In the instant case, Tria was charged with
underscored by the fact that the salary violation of official rules and regulations
attached to it was no more than P1,500.00 a consisting of:. (1) having gone on an
month at the time he went on leave. There extended unauthorized leave of absence; (2)
thus appears nothing to suggest that Tria's having bypassed official channels in
position was "highly" or even "primarily transmitting a report concerning alleged
confidential" in nature. The fact that Tria misfeasance or non-feasance on the part of a
may, sometimes, handle "confidential superior officer of the EIIB directly to the
matters" or papers which are confidential in Office of the President through the Deputy
nature, does not suffice to characterize their Executive Secretary, rather than through the
positions as primarily confidential. respondent EIIB Commissioner.
Accordingly, Tria's particular position of While Tria was probably precipitate in
"Management and Audit Analyst I" is not a leaving for abroad before his application for
"primarily confidential" position so as to vacation leave was formally approved by the
render him removable upon, or the FMIB Central Office in Quezon City, his
expiration of his term of office concurrent application for leave without pay had been
with, "loss of confidence" on the part of the approved or indorsed for approval by his
appointing power who was the then immediate superior in the FMIB, Region 5
Commissioner of the FMIB. Office, and so he was not completely
If Tria was not legally removable upon "loss without basis in believing that the formal
of confidence" on the part of the FMIB approval of his application in the FMIB
Commissioner, was there nonetheless legal Central Office would follow as a matter of
cause provided by law for his dismissal from course.
the service? The extreme penalty of dismissal from the
o We believe that the constitutional service was unduly harsh in the case of
prohibition against suspension or petitioner; a suspension for 30 days would
dismissal of an officer or employee have been more than adequate.
of the Civil Service "except for The act of Tria did not constitute lawful
cause provided by law" is a cause for his dismissal from the service. We
guaranty of both procedural and believe, on the contrary, that Tria's case is
substantive due process. Procedural covered by the rule in Gray v. De Vera.
due process requires that suspension In the case at bar, we note that Tria sent his
or dismissal come, as a general rule, confidential (and presumably sealed) report
only after notice and hearing. to an office having overall administrative
supervision and control over the FMIB (i.e.,
the Office of the President); the report was Petitioner Simplicio Griño assumed office as the
not, in other words, sent either to the media newly elected governor of Iloilo. One month
or to an office or agency having no later, he informed respondent Arandela and all
administrative jurisdiction over the public the legal officers at the Provincial Attorney's
official or office complained of. That report Office about his decision to terminate their
was a privileged communication and the services. In his letter, petitioner Griño made
author thereof enjoys the benefit of the
mention of an article pertaining to the Iloilo
presumption that he acted in good faith.
office of the Provincial Attorney which appeared
The respondents have not alleged that Tria
acted with malice in fact. We do not believe in the Panay News and which "undermined that
that Tria's act constituted serious misconduct trust and confidence" that he reposed on them.
but rather, on the contrary, was an act of Petitioner Demaisip was reappointed by
personal and civic courage by which Tria Governor Griño as the Provincial Attorney, The
exhibited his loyalty to the FMIB as an latter, on the other hand, arranged the
institution and ultimately to the Government replacements of the other legal officers.
Considerations of fundamental public policy Respondent Cirilo Gelvezon was replaced by
thus compel us to hold that Tria was petitioner Santos Aguadera, respondent Nelson
dismissed without lawful cause and must, Geduspan was replaced by petitioner Manuel
therefore, be reinstated to the position he Casumpang and petitioner Manuel Traviña took
previously held or, If that position is no the place of respondent Teodolfo Dato-on.
longer available, to some other position in
the EIIB of equivalent rank and Governor Griño formally terminated the services
emoluments. In addition, Tria is entitled to of the respondents herein on the ground of loss
payment of his backwages. of trust and confidence. This action taken by the
governor was appealed by respondents to the
Griño v. CSC; February 26, 1991; Gancayco, Merit Systems Protection Board of the Civil
J. Service Commission.
Included in the revised staffing pattern is the WON CSC committed GAD in disapproving her
contested position of Supervising Human appointment –
Resource Development Officer. Petitioner was
appointed to the disputed position. The Qualifications of the contested position
are as follows:
Respondents Amparo Dellosa, Rosalinda Juria o EDUCATION - Bachelor’s degree
and Marita Burdeos together with Matilde relevant to the job with at least 9
Angeles, Catalina Espinas, Alicia Nercelles and units in post
Ramon Racela, all of whom are employees in o EXPERIENCE - 2 years of
the Human Resource Training and Material experience in human resource
Development Division, Administrative and development
Manpower Management Service of the DPWH, o CIVIL SERVICE ELIGIBILITY-
jointly lodged a protest before the DPWH task Manpower-Youth Development
Officer, Manpower Development
force on reorganization contesting the
Officer, Relevant RA 1080,
appointment of the petitioner to the position. Relevant Second Level Eligibility
The protestants alleged that since they are next- Career Service (Professional), First
in-rank employees, one of them should have Grade Supervisor
been appointed to the said position. It is not disputed that the petitioner
possesses the appropriate civil service
Task force on reorganization dismissed the eligibility and requisite educational
protest. background.
The controversy then centers on the
CSC disapproved the appointment of Madenilla experience of the petitioner.
and directed the appointing authority to choose o The CSC contends that the
among the protestant to promote to such experience of Medenilla is basically
position. Held that Medenilla does not possess in the field of journalism and not in
the required qualifications for the position. Human Resource Development.
Further, Mendenilla was a contractual employee The Commission also alleges that
while the protestants were permanent. MR since the petitioner is merely a
denied contractual employee, in the
absence of superior qualifications,
Issue: the private respondents must be
preferred not only for the reason that
WON resolutions were issued by the they are permanent career service
Respondent Commission, without giving notice employees but most especially
to the petitioner of the existence of an appeal because they are next-in-rank to the
filed before the CSC, thereby denying the disputed position.
petitioner due process of law. – No
o Finally, the public respondent o "She participated in the preparation
advances the view that, since the and dissemination of the corporate
Revised Administrative Code of planning processes installed and
1987 now provides that the institutionalized in the DPWH.
Commission shall "take appropriate Corporate Planning was introduced
action on all appointment" its by Secretary Fiorello R. Estuar and
authority, therefore, is no longer is now being implemented in all
limited to the mere approval or government offices as instructed by
disapproval of appointments the President.
submitted to it. o "She conducted
A careful review of the records of the case, orientation/reorientation courses in
will reveal that the petitioner possesses the DPWH Regional Offices on (a)
requisite experience for the contested Management By Objectives and
position. Results Evaluation, the Performance
The petitioner, not only was a cum laude Appraisal System, and (b) a
graduate from the University of the specifically designed Performance
Philippines, she has also acquired plenty of Appraisal System for DPWH
experience in the field of Human Resource District Engineers and Division
Development, to wit: Chiefs, being officially used by the
o "She was rated and ranked number DPWH.
one in the Trainor's Training o "She participated in the
Program (120 hours) conducted for conceptualizing and drafting of the
the DPWH by the Phil-Tao, Inc., a Department Order on the DPWH
private firm. Ms. Dellosa was Incentives and Awards System, set
ranked number 7, Mrs. Juria was up in compliance with RA No.
ranked number 10; Mrs. Burdeos 6713."
did not attend the seminar. This The public respondent failed to consider that
training program was undertaken to the petitioner, in her one year and seven
strengthen the capabilities of HRD months experience with Guthrie-Jensen, was
personnel, and to make them more engaged in research relating to performance
effective in the discharge of their appraisal systems and merit promotion
functions. systems which duties are all related to
o "She is a recipient of a special Human Resource Development.
commendation, given by Executive o Precisely, it was because of her
Director Remedios I. Rikken of the experience with Guthrie-Jensen, that
National Commission in the Role of the petitioner was detailed from
Filipino Woman, for her efficiency January 1987 until December 1988
and exemplary performance as a in the Office of the Assistant
facilitator in the conduct of the Secretary for Administration and
workshops during the Second Manpower Management, where she
Congress of Women in was asked to assist in human
Government. resource planning.
o "She obtained in her on-going MBA The petitioner possesses these skills in more
studies at the De La Salle than appropriate quantities.
University, which she pursued as an It can be readily seen that the petitioner
entrance scholar, the highest grade possesses superior qualifications. As earlier
of 4.0, equivalent to 'Excellent' in 2 stated, she is a cum laude graduate of the
HRD related subjects - University of the Philippines.
Organizational Management which She was ranked No. 1 in the department
call for the integration of concepts wide training program handled by a private
with concrete experience.
firm. Two of the respondents were ranked The reason behind P.D. No. 907 (which
way below while a third did not even grants civil service elibility to college
participate. graduates with at least cum laude honors) of
She was commended for exemplary attracting honor graduates into the public
performance as facilitator during the Second service would be negated if they always
Congress of Women in Government. She have to start as Clerk I and wait for
received the highest grades from De La hundreds of deadwood above them to first
Salle University in her MBA studies. go into retirement before they can hope for
She helped draft the human resource significant and fulfilling assignments.
program for the entire DPWH. Inspite of In this case, the contested position was
her being a new employee, she was assigned created in the course of reorganization. The
to conduct seminars on Performance position appears to be a new one. The
Appraisal Systems and on Management by applicability, therefore, of the next-in-rank
Objectives and Results for the DPWH. rule does not come in clearly. Besides, as
She was precisely drafted from a private earlier stated, said rule is not absolute.
firm to assist in human resource planning for There are valid exceptions.
the DPWH. Her work is apparently highly Granting for the sake of argument that the
satisfactory as the top administrators of the case involves a promotional appointment,
DPWH not only appointed her but have the next-in-rank rule must give way to the
asked the respondent Commission to exigencies of the public service. The intent
validate the appointment. of the Civil Service Law is not merely to
Undoubtedly, old employees should be bestow upon permanent employees the
considered first. But it does not necessarily advantage arising from their long
follow that they should then automatically employment but most specially, it is to
be appointed. foster a more efficient public service. Any
The preference given to permanent other factor must, therefore, yield to the
employees assumes that employees working demand for an effective government, which
in a Department for longer periods have necessarily entails the appointment of
gained not only superior skills but also competent, qualified and proficient
greater dedication to the public service. personnel.
This is not always true and the law,
moreover, does not preclude the infusion of
Lusterio v. IAC; July 16, 1991; Davide, J.
new blood, younger dynamism, or necessary
talents into the government service. If, after Facts:
considering all the current employees, the
Department Secretary cannot find among The Office of Supply Officer III (Division of
them the person he needs to revive a Quezon) was rendered vacant when Epifanio
moribund office or to upgrade second rate Pareño retired.
performance, there is nothing in the Civil
Service Law to prevent him from reaching Plaintiff PALOMAR was appointed to the
out to other Departments or to the private position of Supply Officer III by Mr. Lorenzo G.
sector provided all his acts are bona fide for Caesar, Director of the Ministry of Education
the best interest of the public service and the and Culture (MEC), Region IV, on
person chosen has the needed qualifications. recommendation by the then Division
In the present case, there is no indication Superinrentendent (sic) of Schools, Saturnino
that the petitioner was chosen for any other Magturo, which appointment was issued on
reason except to bring in talented person December 5, 1977 but made effective April 11,
with the necessary eligibilities and 1977 and which appointment was 'permanent'
qualifications for important assignments in
but qualified by the condition typewritten on its
the Department.
fact that it is 'subject to the final outcome' of the The trial court ruled that pursuant to Section
protest filed by Jose Lusterio 19(3) of P.D. No. 807 (The Civil Service
Decree) and the Rules on Personnel Actions and
Policies promulgated by the Civil Service
PALOMAR assumed office on April 11, 1977 at Commission on next-in-rank positions, the
a time when Mr. Parreño, the retiree was still on position of Supervisory Fiscal Clerk previously
terminal leave occupied by private respondent, is immediately
next to the contested position in the
That the MEC denied LUSTERIO'S protest on organizational chart of the Division of Quezon
the ground of lack of merit, ruling that Mr. for the Administrative Staff.
Palomar meets all the requirements for
appointment as Supply Officer III i.e., next in Upon the other hand, petitioner, prior to his
rank, competence and qualifications and appointment to the contested position, was
appropriate civil service eligibility, this office Supply Officer I in Lucban National High
finds the protest of Mr. Lusterio without merit School in Lucban, Quezon; consequently, he
and holds that the enclosed appointment of the does not belong to the organizational unit where
former be not disturbed. MR denied the vacancy exists.
LUSTERIO filed an appeal to the OP. The Circular No. 5, Series of 1963 of the then
appeal of LUSTERIO was endorsed for Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports
comment to the CIVIL SERVICE provides that "for reasons of equity and morale,
COMMISSION. The Civil Service Commission fully qualified employees within the
referred the appeal for comment and organizational unit, all circumstances being
recommendation to the Secretary of Education equal, should have first call upon promotional
and Culture. The MEC reiterated its decision. opportunities,"
On September 3, 1978 the Civil Service Unable to accept that decision, petitioner herein
Commission thru the Merit System Board appealed to the then Intermediate Appellate
recommended the rescission of the appointment Court. He asks said Court to overturn the
issued in favor of PALOMAR appointing him to decision of the trial court because it erred in
be not a qualified next in rank employee and declaring valid, effective, and in accordance
recommended further the appointment of with law the appointment of private respondent
LUSTERIO who according to its findings as Supply Officer III the Intermediate Court
occupies a functionally related position and rules that the appeal has no merit and sustains
qualified thereto as next in rank the findings and conclusion of the trial court that
private respondent has a better right to the
By virtue of the recommendation of the Merit contested position than petitioner because the
System Board, OP rendered a decision on the latter, unlike the former, does not belong to the
appeal of LUSTERIO, rescinding the organizational unit where the vacancy exists. It
appointment of PALOMAR in favor of further holds that private respondent possesses
LUSTERIO the requisite educational competence and civil
The said appointment was received by the Civil service eligibility, has completed in-service
Service Commission and approved as training courses on supply and property
'permanent' subject to no condition. Defendant management and had performed the duties of
LUSTERIO assumed office as Division Supply Supply Officer III from April 1977 up to
Officer III. MR of plaintiff PALOMAR was October 1979.
dismissed for lack of merit by OP Issue:
WON IAC erred in holding that Palomar has a vacancy occurs in a position in the second
better right to the contested position – NO level of the Career Service, the employee in
the government service who occupies the
Ratio: next lower positions in the occupational
group under which the vacant position is
Palomar was a Supervising Fiscal Clerk classified and in other functionally related
before his appointment to the contested occupational groups and who are competent,
position. His functions then covered an
qualified and with the appropriate civil
aspect of supply activities, i.e., the fiscal
service eligibility, "shall be considered for
requirements of supplies and materials for promotion". It does not say "shall be
the division office. Moreover, he had promoted".
completed in service courses in supply and
property management. As correctly ruled by
the Secretary of Education and Culture, and People v. Reyes (RTC Judge); August 14,
held by the trial court and the respondent 1995; Puno, J.
IAC, Palomar meets all the requirements for
the position of Supply Officer III. Even if Facts:
We grant for the sake of argument that
Lusterio is also qualified, the appointing Respondent Buenaventura C. Maniego,
authority had the discretion to determine Collector of Customs, Collection District II,
who of those qualified should be appointed Bureau of Customs, Manila International
to the contested position. Container Port (MICP), issued MICP Customs
It was an error for both courts below to Personnel Order No. 21-92 dated January 10,
restrictively limit the concept of next-in- 1992 assigning Jovencio D. Ebio, Customs
rank to the organizational unit where the Operation Chief, MICP to the Office of the
vacancy occurs, which is, in this case, the Deputy Collector of Customs for Operations as
division office of Quezon and more Special Assistant. The actual transfer of Ebio
specifically, to the Administrative Staff was made on January 14, 1992.
therein.
Section 3 of Rule V on Promotions of the Ebio filed with the COMELEC a letter-
Civil Service Rules on Personnel Actions complaint protesting his transfer. Ebio claimed
and Policies: “A next-in-rank position refers that his new assignment violated COMELEC
to a position which, by reason of the Resolution No. 2333 and Section 261 (h) of B.P.
hierarchical arrangement of positions in the Blg. 881, the Omnibus Election Code (OEC),
Department or agency or in the government, which prohibit the transfer of any employee in
is determined to be in the nearest degree of the civil service 120 days before the May 11,
relationship to a higher position taking into
1992 synchronized national and local elections.
account the following: (1) organization
structure/s as reflected in the approved
organizational chart/s; (2) classification
and/or functional relationships; (3) salary After a preliminary investigation, the
and/or range allocation; and (4) COMELEC filed an information with the RTC
geographical location.” charging respondent Maniego with a violation of
The organizational unit is not the sole Section 261 (h) of OEC.
criterion. And even if We have to further
concede that Lusterio then occupied a next- Maniego moved to quash the information on the
in-rank position, that fact alone did not make ground that the facts alleged do not constitute an
it mandatory for the appointing power to offense. He contended that the transfer of Ebio
appoint him to the contested position. on January 14, 1992 did not violate B.P. Blg.
Section 19(3) of PD 807 (Civil Service 881 because on that date the act was not yet
Decree) merely provides that when a punishable as an election offense. It purportedly
became punishable only on January 15, 1992, predict. Without this inherent prerogative,
the date of effectivity of COMELEC Resolution the appointing authority may not be able to
No. 2333 implementing Section 261 (h) of B.P. cape with emergencies to the detriment of
Blg. 881. RTC granted motion to quash public service.
Clearly then, the transfer or detail of a
Issue: government officer or employee will not be
penalized by Section 261 (h) of B.P. Blg.
WON Maniego violated the transfer prohibition 881 if done to promote efficiency in the
– NO government service.
Sec. 261. Prohibited acts. The following Hence, Section 2 of Resolution No. 2333
shall be guilty of any election offense: provides that the COMELEC has to pass
o (h) Transfer of officers and upon the reason for the proposed transfer or
employees in the civil service. Any detail, viz: "Any request for authority to
public official who makes or causes make or cause any transfer or detail of any
any transfer or detail whatever of officer or employee in the civil service,
any officer or employee in the civil including public school teachers, shall be
service including public school submitted in writing to the Commission
teachers, within the election period indicating therein the office and place to
except upon prior approval of the which the officer or employee is proposed to
Commission be transferred or detailed, and stating the
reason therefor.
The Constitution has fixed the election
period for all elections to commence ninety Prescinding from this predicate, 2 elements
(90) days before the day of election and end must be established to prove a violation of
thirty (30) days thereafter, unless otherwise Section 261 (h) of B.P. Blg. 881, viz:
fixed in special cases by the COMELEC. (1) The fact of transfer or detail of a
For the May 11, 1992 synchronized national public officer or employee within the
and local elections, the COMELEC fixed a election period as fixed by the
longer election period of one hundred COMELEC, and
twenty (120) days before the scheduled
(2) the transfer or detail was effected
elections and thirty (30) days thereafter. It
issued Resolution No. 2314 on September without prior approval of the
23, 1991 primarily adopting therein a COMELEC in accordance with its
calendar of activities. In the process, it implementing rules and regulations.
designated January 12, 1992 to June 10,
1992 as the election period
On January 2, 1992, the COMELEC In the case at bench, respondent Maniego
promulgated Resolution No. 2328 for the transferred Ebio, then the Customs
sole and specific purpose of fixing for the Operation Chief, MICP to the Office of the
said elections the election period from Deputy Collector of Customs for Operations
January 12, 1992 to June 10, 1992 as Special Assistant on January 14, 1992.
It ought to be immediately obvious that On this date, January 14, 1992, the election
Section 261 (h) of B.P. Blg. 881 does period for the May 11, 1992 synchronized
not per se outlaw the transfer of a elections had already been fixed to
government officer or employee during the commence January 12, 1992 until June 10,
election period. 1992.
To be sure, the transfer or detail of a public As aforestated, this election period had been
officer or employee is a prerogative of the determined by the COMELEC in its
appointing authority. It is necessary to meet Resolution No. 2314 dated November 20,
the exigencies of public service sometimes 1991 and Resolution No. 2328 dated
too difficult to perceive and January 2, 1992.
o Nonetheless, it was only in Among those affected by the reassignment was
Resolution No. 2333 which took private respondent Salvador Nori Blas, who was
effect on January 15, 1992 that ordered to report to Revenue District No. 14 in
COMELEC promulgated the Tuguegarao, Cagayan. In turn, petitioner Solon
necessary rules on how to get its B. Alcantara was ordered to report to Blas'
approval on the transfer or detail of former post in San Fernando, Pampanga, now
public officers or employees during
known as Revenue District No. 21.
the election period.
o Before the effectivity of these rules, On December 15, 1993, private respondent
it cannot be said that Section 261 (h) wrote petitioner Commissioner requesting a
of B.P. Blg. 881, a penal provision, reconsideration of his transfer. He felt that his
was already enforceable. Needless accomplishments and performance had not been
to state, respondent Maniego could
taken into consideration in the reshuffle and that
not be charged with failing to secure
the approval of the COMELEC his transfer from what he thought is the larger
when he transferred Ebio on January revenue district of San Fernando, Pampanga to
14, 1992 as on that day, the rules of the smaller district in Tuguegarao, Cagayan was
the COMELEC on the subject were a demotion. He claimed that he was among the
yet inexistent. top ten examiners of Revenue Region No. 5 for
six consecutive years and that he was a model
Vinzons-Chato v. Natividad; June 2, 1995; employee in 1981. In addition, he mentioned
Mendoza, J. that he was a diabetic and that he needed to be
near his doctor, and could not endure long
Facts:
travels.
President Fidel V. Ramos issued E.O. No. 132,
entitled "Approving the Streamlining of the
Bureau of Internal Revenue." His letter unacted upon, private respondent filed
with the RTC a verified complaint for
Pursuant to this Order, Petitioner issued
"Injunction with Preliminary Injunction and
Revenue Administrative Order No. 5-93,
Temporary Restraining Order" against the
"Redefining the areas of jurisdiction and
Commissioner and petitioner Alcantara. He
renumbering of regional district offices."
alleged that the transfer without his consent from
The order subdivided the 19 revenue regions the revenue district in San Fernando, which was
provided for under the NIRC into 115 revenue formerly designated as a Class "A," to the
districts and renumbered the resulting revenue revenue district in Tuguegarao, which was
district office (RDOs). classified as a Class "C," with a smaller pool of
personnel and only one-fourth of the revenue
In addition, it abolished the previous capacity of Pampanga, would cause his
classification of RDOs into Class A-1, A, B, C, "dislocation" and demotion or "a diminution in
and D and provided that henceforth all RDOs rank, status, and span of duties and
shall be treated as the same class responsibilities."
Petitioner, citing the "exigencies of the revenue The respondent judge issued a TRO and set the
service," issued Revenue Travel Assignment hearing on the application for a writ of
Order No. 80-93 (RTAO 80-93), directing preliminary injunction which was eventually
ninety revenue district officers to report to new granted
assignments in the redesignated and renumbered
revenue district offices nationwide. Issue:
WON The transfer was valid – Yes
Private respondent has shown no clear legal clear legal right; that such right has
right to the issuance of a writ of preliminary been violated; and that he is entitled
injunction but despite this fact the trial court to the relief he demands, consisting
issued his questioned order enjoining in restraining the commission of the
petitioner from transferring private acts complained of
respondent. Private respondent's transfer is part of a
In his complaint below, private respondent nationwide reshuffle or reassignment of
claimed that he was demoted because, the revenue district officers designed to improve
revenue district that is the northernmost revenue collection.
mainland province of Cagayan has only one- More specifically the objective of the
fourth (1/4) the revenue capacity of reassignment, as stated in Revenue
Pampanga, plaintiff's present station Administrative Order No. 5-93, is "to
(Cagayan P45.5 million; Pampanga - P194.1 strengthen the decentralization of the
million; 87 BIR Annual Report); a Bureau's set-up for the purpose of
diminution in rank, status and span of duties maximizing tax assessments and revenue
and responsibilities; and a dislocation from collections, intensifying enforcement of
Pampanga, a province 100 kilometers north revenue laws and regulations and bringing
of Manila to Cagayan; over 500 kilometers the revenue service closer to the taxpaying
northeast of Manila public."
But his transfer to the Tuguegarao revenue
district, as petitioner Commissioner
explained in her opposition to the Private respondent failed to show patent
application for a writ of preliminary illegality in the action of the Commissioner
injunction, did not really entail any constituting violation of his right to security
diminution in rank, salary, status and of tenure. To sustain his contention that his
responsibilities. Private respondent's claim transfer constitutes a demotion simply
that the Tuguegarao revenue district is because the new assignment is not to his
smaller than that in San Fernando, liking would be to subordinate government
Pampanga has no basis because, as already projects, along with the great resources and
noted, the classification of RDOs into Class efforts they entail, to the individual
A-1, A, B, C and D has been abolished and preferences and opinions of civil service
all RDOs are now considered to be of the employees.
same class. Such contention would negate the principle
Nor did petitioner allege in his complaint that a public office is a public trust and that
below that he had a vested right to his post it is not the private preserve of any person.
as revenue district officer of Revenue In granting an injunction despite the absence
District No. 21 (formerly No. 18) in San of any legal right to be protected, respondent
Fernando, Pampanga. The trial court's order committed a grave abuse of its discretion.
granting the writ of preliminary injunction Moreover, under the law, any employee who
cites no right of private respondent which questions the validity of his transfer should
might have been violated as a result of his appeal to the Civil Service Commission.
unconsented transfer to Tuguegarao. The Respondent judge should have dismissed the
only reason given for the writ of preliminary action below for failure of private
injunction is that it is needed to preserve the respondent to exhaust administrative
status quo until the issues can be "threshed remedies.
out in full blown trial."
o But the preservation of the status Vinzons-Chato v. Zeneroza; October 20,
quo is not alone sufficient to justify 2000; Buena, J.
the issuance of an injunction. The
plaintiff must show that he has a Facts:
Petitioner Liwayway Vinzons-Chato, then CIR, issued the now questioned RTAO 8-95. Private
issued Revenue Travel Assignment Order respondent now claims that the questioned
(RTAO) No. 8-95. Pursuant thereto, private RTAO 8-95, is tantamount to a demotion since
respondent Estrella V. Martinez, along with the position she was transferred to - Assistant
others, was reassigned from Assistant Revenue Division Chief, Collections Program Division
District Officer of Revenue District Office Chief, National Office - does not involve
(RDO) No. 34 - Paco - Pandacan - San Andres - assessment and is totally alien to the past
Sta. Ana area - to Assistant Division Chief, experience and skills of private respondent as an
Collection Programs Division, National Office Assistant Revenue District Officer of RDO 34.
in Quezon City, and assigned in her place, as Besides private respondent asserts that she will
Assistant Regional District Officer of RDO No. be dislocated since she has no experience in the
34 was Jacinto T. Marcelo. collection service, in violation of Executive
Order No. 132 dated October 26, 1993 which
Private respondent filed on April 4, 1995, with
prohibits the transfer of personnel resulting in
the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, a
dislocation.
petition for injunction docketed as Civil Case
No. 95-23498 with prayer for issuance of a writ Trial court issued a TRO in an Order dated April
of preliminary injunction and temporary 28, 1995. Thereafter, in an Order dated May 18,
restraining order, to restrain petitioner Marcelo 1995, respondent Judge granted the writ of
from assuming the post of Assistant Regional preliminary injunction enjoining the
District Officer of RDO No. 34. implementation of RTAO 8-95
In that petition, private respondent alleged that SC issued TRO, to which Martinez replied that
prior to the questioned RTAO 8-95, the retiring she will be taking the appropriate legal remedies
Revenue Officer of RDO No. 34, Jose T. available to her by law since the 15 day period
Jacalan, wrote the BIR Commissioner endorsing for the TRO to be final and executory has not
and strongly recommending private respondents' yet elapsed. She went on leave of absence; thus,
promotion as Revenue Officer of RDO 34. the BIR suspended her on the ground of gross
Notwithstanding such recommendation, another insubordination. It ruled that Martinez did not
BIR employee Isidro Tecson Jr., was assigned need to go on leave of absence because she is
by the Commissioner in place of Jose T. Jacalan. ipso facto considered on leave of absence upon
her failure to comply with the RTAO. Because
This prompted private respondent to file with the
of the suspension, Martinez filed a motion to cite
Grievance Committee of the Department of
Chato in contempt alleging that such suspension
Finance a complaint for violation of Merit
order pre-empts any decision of the SC on the
Promotion Plan under BIR Memorandum Order
validity and legality of the RTAO. This motion
No. 39-93. On July 10, 1995 the Grievance
to cite Chato in contempt was denied, which
Committee issued a resolution enjoining the BIR
denial became final after the MR filed by
to strictly adhere to the established and CSC-
Martinez was denied by the SC. Martinez further
approved merit promotion plan in making the
claimed that she was compelled to use her
appointment to create equal opportunities for
accumulated leave credits amounting to over
advancement to all qualified and competent
350 working days in order to resist the RTAO.
employees of the BIR.
Thus, she prays for the nullification of the
According to private respondent, instead of unlawful orders of Chato so that her leave
complying with the said resolution, petitioner credits will be restored.
Chato, in a clear act of spite, whim, and
Issue:
vindictiveness against a subordinate employee
who dared to question petitioners' unlawful acts,
WON the CIR is authorized to assign or reassign failed to establish a valid claim or a vested
internal revenue officers and employees of the right to the post of Assistant Revenue
BIR as the exigencies of service may require, District Officer of RDO No. 34. Therefore,
without demotion in rank and salary in the respondent judge committed grave abuse
accordance with Civil Service Rules and of discretion in granting the writ of
Regulations – YES. preliminary injunction because private
respondent has no actual existing right
Ratio: which is infringed upon by RTAO No. 8-95.
There is no merit in the argument of private
The Commissioner of Internal Revenue is respondent that she will be demoted by her
authorized to assign or reassign internal transfer to the National Office, Collection
revenue officers and employees of the BIR Programs Division because she was
as the exigencies of service may require, reassigned to a position totally alien to her
without demotion in rank and salary in proven area of expertise in assessment. The
accordance with Civil Service Rules and authority of the BIR Commissioner to issue
Regulation. reassignment order has been upheld by this
The primary reason why private respondent Court in an En Banc Decision dated June 2,
refuses to comply with RTAO 8-95 was 1995, in the case of Hon. Liwayway
because she took it as an act of Vinzons-Chato vs. Hon. Eli G. C. Natividad,
vindictiveness and reprisal on the part of the where we held that:
Commissioner, consequent to her filing a o "Private respondent failed to show
complaint against the assigned RDO of patent illegality in the action of the
RDO No. 34 Isidoro Tecson, Jr. (now Commissioner constituting violation
deceased), on the basis of a prior assignment of his right to security of tenure. To
order issued by the Commissioner. Nowhere sustain his contention that his
in the assignment order, RTAO 8-95, can it transfer constitutes a demotion
be gleaned that the reassignment was for the simply because the new assignment
purpose of harassing private respondent. In is not to his liking would be to
fact, private respondent was not the only one subordinate government projects,
reassigned to a new post. along with the great resources and
Private respondent holds the appointment of efforts they entail, to the individual
Chief Revenue Officer II and such preferences and opinions of civil
appointment will not be altered by her service employees. Such contention
subsequent reassignment as Assistant would negate the principle that a
Division Chief of the Collection Programs public office is a public trust and
Division, National Office. Such that it is not the private preserve of
reassignment is not a demotion for there is any person."
no diminution of rank, salary, status and In line with the said Decision, this Court
responsibilities. cannot sustain the contention of private
Private respondent was merely assigned as respondent that she was forced to use more
Assistant Revenue District Officer of BIR than three hundred fifty (350) days of her
Revenue District Office No. 34 and the accumulated leave credits in order to resist
Commissioner may assign or reassign the assailed RTAO 8-95, and prays that her
revenue officers, as the exigencies of the leave credits be restored. The writ of
service may require. Such reassignment of preliminary injunction issued by the trial
revenue officers entails the prevention of court, which enjoined the transfer of private
familiarity and patronage between BIR respondent, was countermanded by the
officers and taxpayers of a particular area. temporary restraining order subsequently
Accordingly, the injunction issued against issued by this Court, with the result that
the implementation of RTAO 8-95 was petitioner's transfer became effective again.
unwarranted because private respondent We therefore find that the trial court
committed a grave abuse of discretion in facing charges before the Legal Division, which
issuing the assailed writ of preliminary he, however, denied.
injunction.
The records disclose that on 16 April 1985,
Domingo B. Nunez, Research Specialist and
Republic and Corpuz v CA and Lopez; Chief of the Intellectual Emotional Development
February 26, 1990; Melencio-Herrera, J. Research Unit of the CYRC, tendered his
Facts: resignation as such "because I cannot stand the
harassment of the Assistant Director, Mr. Jose P.
Petitioner Corpuz and Respondent Lopez, Jr., Lopez, is doing to us employees. I am afraid I
were the former Director and Assistant Director, cannot continue working with dignity and with
respectively, of the now defunct Child and peace of mind in such situation."
Youth Research Center (CYRC) of the
Department of Education, Culture and Sports In another letter of the same date, Joseph D. de
(DECS). Petitioner Corpuz is a Doctor of los Santos, Senior Educational Researcher of the
Medicine while Respondent Lopez is a Bachelor CYRC, also reported on an act of harassment on
of Laws graduate but not yet a member of the his person by Respondent Lopez and concluding
Bar. Petitioner Republic of the Philippines "I doubt whether I can stay long enough with the
(DECS/CYRC) has joined Petitioner Corpuz in office with this kind of environment." On 7 May
this case, on the ground that the acts for which 1985, the "CYRC Staff Personnel and
she is taken to task by Respondent Lopez have Contractual Employees" of the CYRC wrote the
been performed in her official capacity. Education Minister calling attention to the
"prevailing sick situation in the Office" and
The "bad blood" between the parties complaining against the acts of harassment
commenced when Respondent Lopez protested "being done to the employees of this Office by
Petitioner Corpuz appointment as CYRC the Asst. Director, causing more harm than
Director on the ground that he had a better right good."
to the position. The dismissal of that protest by
the Civil Service Commission was affirmed by After about 6-1/12 months of re-assignment,
this Court. Then followed a series of cases, Respondent Lopez wrote a letter to Minister
approximately 49 in all, filed by Respondent Laya expressing his intention to resume his
Lopez against Petitioner Corpuz and/or some of official position as CYRC Assistant Director.
the CYRC Staff before different judicial and Having received no response, he returned to the
administrative fora. CYRC as Assistant Director without official
authorization.
The charges ranged from those of graft, grave
misconduct, dishonesty, inefficiency, and grave This prompted Petitioner Corpuz to issue 2
abuse of discretion. Most of the cases were Memoranda on 21 February 1985: The first was
dismissed, however, for having been found to be addressed to the CYRC Staff advising that
frivolous except one case before the Respondent Lopez would not be considered an
Ombudsman involving the same facts as in this active member of the Staff until he first secured
case, which is awaiting the outcome herein. the proper authorization for his transfer. The
other was addressed to Lopez himself requesting
On 11 July 1984, then MECS Minister Jaime C. him to submit an official order terminating his
Laya "temporarily detailed" Respondent Lopez "detail."
to the MECS Legal Office until further advice
"in the exigencies of the service." Sometime In his reply, dated 22 February 1985,
later, he was transferred to the Planning Service Respondent Lopez insisted on the validity of his
Office of the MECS, it appearing that he was resumption of office stating that "no one can be
detailed for more than 3 months without the Quisumbing ordered such payment but the same
written consent of the employee concerned" and was later reconsidered and recalled upon query
that "detailed assignment beyond 6 months has from Petitioner Corpuz regarding the matter.
to be approved by the CSC and the Office of the
RTC rendered a "Partial Decision" ordering
President." He also admonished Petitioner
Petitioner Corpuz to take official cognizance of
Corpuz to recall and/or rectify her memoranda.
Respondent Lopez's attendance at the CYRC: to
On 15 March 1985, Petitioner Corpuz addressed pay his salaries corresponding to the period from
another memorandum to Respondent Lopez 23 April 1985 "to date"; and setting the case for
insisting on his compliance with her directive further hearing to determine the actual amount
and requiring him, effective on the same date, to of damages allegedly sustained by him.
submit a record of his attendance duly signed by
Petitioner appealed to Respondent Court of
the Chief of the MECS Planning Service or an
Appeals. During the pendency thereof, the
approved application for leave of absence
CYRC was abolished and both Petitioner and
before. he could be entitled to his salary. Just the
Respondent were retired from Government
same, Petitioner allowed the payment of
service. Nevertheless, neither one could draw
Respondent's salaries and allowances for the
retirement benefits in view of the pendency of
period 18 February 1985 to 22 April 1985, but
this suit.
withheld those corresponding to the period 23
April to 14 August 1985 because of CA affirmed in toto
Respondent's refusal to comply with her
directive to return to the MECS Central Office. Issue:
On 1 April 1985, Respondent Lopez filed a WON Petitioner Corpuz was justified in refusing
Petition for mandamus with Damages against to take official cognizance of Respondent
Petitioner Corpuz, Minister Laya, and the Chief, Lopez's attendance as Assistant Director at the
Administrative Services, before the RTC. CYRC and in withholding his salaries
During the pendency of the case or, on 7 August corresponding to the period - YES
1985, then Minister Laya advised Respondent Ratio:
Lopez that his "temporary detail" in the Planning
Service Office of the Ministry had been rectified It will be recalled that Respondent Lopez
to "temporary assignment" effective 3 returned to the CYRC at his own instance
September 1984, to continue until further without any authorization from higher
advice, and that approval from the office should authorities. Petitioner Corpuz as CYRC
first be secured before returning to the CYRC. Director, officially advised him to secure
Respondent requested such clearance but since it that clearance, but he adamantly refused to
obey a directive from his immediate
was left unanswered, he returned to the MECS
superior.
Central Office presumably around 14 August
Under the circumstances, Petitioner Corpuz
1985. Laya was later dropped as a party as head of the office, was left with no
In a 1st Indorsement, dated 16 October 1985, alternative but to withhold recognition of his
Petitioner Corpuz was informed by the Deputy attendance at the CYRC. To maintain
discipline in the office, and in the interests
Minister of Education that the Ministry had
of the service, she could do no less.
approved the release of Respondent's salaries for
Respondent Appellate Court, however,
the period 23 April to 14 August 1985. This was
affirmed the finding of the Trial Court that
reiterated by Minister Laya in his Fifth the DECS Minister's directive to Respondent
Indorsement, dated 9 December 1985. Similarly, Lopez was "defective" in that the term
on 20 March 1986, then Secretary Lourdes "detail" was used instead of "re-
assignment," which would have been the counsel." Mitigating such sanction,
proper terminology. however, is the provocation given by
Indeed, a "detail" is the movement from one Respondent Lopez, his open defiance of
Department or Agency to another which is authority, and oppressive behavior towards
temporary in nature (Section 4, Rule VI, his co-employees.
Civil Service Rules on Personal Actions and It is inaccurate for Respondent Lopez to
Policies) whereas a "re-assignment" is the allege that he was paid his salaries for 18
movement of an employee from one February to 22 April 1985 without
organizational unit to another in the same submission of his official time records. As
Department or Agency (Section 5, Ibid.). certified to by the CYRC Disbursing Officer
Be that as it may, the official intent of the on 22 May 1985, he received his salary for
directive was clear to move Respondent the second half of March 1985 on 2 April
Lopez away from the CYRC and locate him 1985 after he submitted his time card for the
in the head office, "in the exigencies of the month of March.
service." Besides, proper rectification was It was only from 23 April 1985 to 14 August
made by Minister Laya on 7 August 1985 1985 that his salaries and allowances were
retroactive to 3 September 1984. again withheld upon petitioner's instructions
As matters stood, Respondent Lopez after she had received official confirmation
brought upon himself the withholding of his from MECS in the latter's 1st Indorsement,
salaries. When he reported back to the dated 22 April 1985, that prior MECS
CYRC on 18 February 1985 he did so at his authorization was, in fact, required before he
own instance without prior authorization. could return to the CYRC. In this
He was advised to secure such clearance on connection, it was reversible error, therefore,
21 February 1985 but he refused. The for both lower Courts to have ordered
directive to obtain the same was reiterated payment of Respondent's salaries from 23
on 27 February 1985 by Petitioner Corpuz. April 1985 "to date."
Instead of complying, he addressed a letter Petitioner Corpuz had not acted in bad faith
on 6 March 1985 to the Deputy Minister in seeking clarification of the directives to
requesting clarification. He was given the pay issued by the Education Department.
same opinion. On 15 March 1985, he was Those were given only during the pendency
again reminded and was required to submit a of the case below besides the fact that the
record of his attendance duly signed by the order of Secretary Lourdes Quisumbing,
Chief of the MECS Planning Services or an who succeeded Minister Laya, to pay
approved application for leave of absence Respondent Lopez's salaries was later
before he could be entitled to his salary. withdrawn by her for further review.
He reacted by stating that the requirement
was "superfluous." And when he did
comply, discrepancies were discovered CSC v. Pacheo; Januray 25, 2012; Mendoza,
between his submissions and those in the J.
CYRC logbook. Respondent Lopez was Facts:
himself, therefore, recreant in complying
with the requirements for the release of his Pacheo was a Revenue Attorney IV, Assistant
salaries. Chief of the Legal Division of the BIR in
It is true that Petitioner Corpuz had issued Revenue Region No. 7, Quezon City
memoranda, dated 19 December 1985 and 7
January 1986, suggesting that Respondent BIR issued Revenue Travel Assignment Order
Lopez withdraw his suit for mandamus in (RTAO) No. 25-2002, ordering the reassignment
order to expedite the release of his salaries. of Pacheo as Assistant Chief, Legal Division
For this, she deserves censure specially from RR7 in Quezon City to RR4 in San
since it was done "against the advice of her Fernando, Pampanga. The BIR cited exigencies
of the revenue service as basis for the issuance W/N Pacheos assignment constitutes
of the said RTAO. constructive dismissal and, thus, entitling her to
reinstatement and backwages. Was Pacheo
Pacheo questioned the reassignment through her
constructively dismissed by reason of her
Letter dated May 9, 2002 addressed to Rene G.
reassignment? – YES
Banez, then CIR. She complained that the
transfer would mean economic dislocation since Ratio:
she would have to spend ₱200.00 on daily travel
expenses or approximately ₱4,000.00 a month. It While a temporary transfer or assignment of
personnel is permissible even without the
would also mean physical burden on her part as
employee's prior consent, it cannot be done
she would be compelled to wake up early in the
when the transfer is a preliminary step
morning for her daily travel from Quezon City toward his removal, or a scheme to lure him
to San Fernando, Pampanga, and to return home away from his permanent position, or when
late at night from San Fernando, Pampanga to it is designed to indirectly terminate his
Quezon City. She was of the view that that her service, or force his resignation. Such a
reassignment was merely intended to harass and transfer would in effect circumvent the
force her out of the BIR in the guise of provision which safeguards the tenure of
exigencies of the revenue service. In sum, she office of those who are in the Civil Service.
considered her transfer from Quezon City to Significantly, Section 6, Rule III of CSC
Pampanga as amounting to a constructive Memorandum Circular No. 40, series of
dismissal. 1998, defines constructive dismissal as a
situation when an employee quits his work
because of the agency heads unreasonable,
humiliating, or demeaning actuations which
Due to the then inaction of the BIR, Pacheo filed render continued work impossible. Hence,
a complaint before the CSC- National Capital the employee is deemed to have been
Region (CSC-NCR), praying for the illegally dismissed.
nullification of RTAO No. 25-2002, it treated o This may occur although there is no
Pacheos Complaint as an appeal and dismissed diminution or reduction of salary of
the same, without prejudice, for failure to the employee. It may be a transfer
comply with Sections 73 and 74 of Rule V(b) of from one position of dignity to a
the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in more servile or menial job.
the Civil Service. The CSC, through the OSG, contends that
the deliberate refusal of Pacheo to report for
Pacheo appealed her case before the CSC. work either in her original station in Quezon
Granted. RTAO was not valid and ordered City or her new place of assignment in San
Pacheo to be recalled to her previous Fernando, Pampanga negates her claim of
assignment, but withholding by the BIR of constructive dismissal in the present case
Pacheos salary for the period she did not report being in violation of Section 24 (f) of P.D.
to work is justified (no work, no pay). 807 [now Executive Order (EO) 292, Book
V, Title 1, Subtitle A, Chapter 5, Section 26
MR of Pacheo denied (6)].
It further argues that the subject RTAO was
CA reversed –finding petitioner to have been immediately executory, unless otherwise
constructively dismissed and ordering her ordered by the CSC. It was, therefore,
immediate reinstatement with full backwages incumbent on Pacheo to have reported to her
and benefits new place of assignment and then appealed
her case to the CSC if she indeed believed
Issue: that there was no justification for her
reassignment.
Anent the first argument of CSC, the Court movement from one agency to another while
cannot sustain the proposition. It was legally a reassignment requires a movement within
impossible for Pacheo to report to her the same agency.
original place of assignment in Quezon City Moreover, pending appeal with the CSC, an
considering that the subject RTAO No. 25- order to detail is immediately executory,
2002 also reassigned Amado Rey B. whereas a reassignment order does not
Pagarigan (Pagarigan) as Assistant Chief, become immediately effective.
Legal Division, from RR4, San Fernando, In the case at bench, the lateral movement of
Pampanga to RR7, Quezon City, the very Pacheo as Assistant Chief, Legal Division
same position Pacheo formerly held. The from Quezon City to San Fernando,
reassignment of Pagarigan to the same Pampanga within the same agency is
position palpably created an impediment to undeniably a reassignment. The OSG posits
Pacheos return to her original station. that she should have first reported to her
The Court finds Itself unable to agree to new place of assignment and then
CSCs argument that the subject RTAO was subsequently question her reassignment. It is
immediately executory. The Court deems it clear, however, from E.O. 292, Book V,
necessary to distinguish between a detail and Title 1, Subtitle A, Chapter 5, Section 26 (7)
reassignment, as they are governed by that there is no such duty to first report to
different rules. the new place of assignment prior to
A detail is defined and governed by questioning an alleged invalid reassignment
Executive Order 292, Book V, Title 1, imposed upon an employee. Pacheo was
Subtitle A, Chapter 5, Section 26 (6), thus: well within her right not to report
o (6) Detail. A detail is the movement immediately to RR4, San Fernando,
of an employee from one agency to Pampanga, and to question her
another without the issuance of an reassignment.
appointment and shall be allowed, Reassignments involving a reduction in
only for a limited period in the case rank, status or salary violate an employees
of employees occupying security of tenure, which is assured by the
professional, technical and scientific Constitution, the Administrative Code of
positions. If the employee believes 1987, and the Omnibus Civil Service Rules
that there is no justification for the and Regulations.
detail, he may appeal his case to the Security of tenure covers not only
Commission. Pending appeal, the employees removed without cause, but also
decision to detail the employee shall cases of unconsented transfers and
be executory unless otherwise reassignments, which are tantamount to
ordered by the Commission. illegal/constructive removal.
On the other hand, a reassignment is defined The Court is not unaware that the BIR is
and governed by E.O. 292, Book V, Title 1, authorized to assign or reassign internal
Subtitle A, Chapter 5, Section 26 (7), thus: revenue officers and employees as the
o (7) Reassignment.An employee may exigencies of service may require. This
be reassigned from one authority of the BIR, however, should be
organizational unit to another in the prudently exercised in accordance with
same agency; Provided, That such existing civil service rules.
reassignment shall not involve a Having ruled that Pacheo was constructively
reduction in rank, status or salaries. dismissed, is she entitled to reinstatement
The principal distinctions between a detail and back wages? The Court agrees with the
and reassignment lie in the place where the CA that she is entitled to reinstatement, but
employee is to be moved and in its finds Itself unable to sustain the ruling that
effectivity pending appeal with the CSC. she is entitled to full back wages and
Based on the definition, a detail requires a benefits. It is a settled jurisprudence that an
illegally dismissed civil service employee is for two cases both involving dishonesty, abuse
entitled to back salaries but limited only to a of privileges and character unbecoming a
maximum period of five (5) years, and not government official,
full back salaries from his illegal dismissal
up to his reinstatement. (c) improper, inappropriate and devoid of moral
justification, and (d) a violation of Civil Service
rules and regulation considering that it violates
the rule on nepotism since Epitacio Lanuza and
Teotico v. Agda; May 29, 1991; Davide, J. Administrator Lanuza are cousins