Pubof cases

8/18/2019 Pubof cases

1/28

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT

Manila

EN BANC

G.R. No. 79974 December 17, 1987

ULPIANO P. SARMIENTO III AND JUANITO G. ARCILLA, petitioners,

s!

SALVADOR MISON, in his capaci! as COMMISSIONER O" T#E $UREAU O"

CUSTOMS, AND GUILLERMO CARAGUE, in his capaci! as SECRETAR% O" T#E

DEPARTMENT O" $UDGET, respondents,

COMMISSION ON APPOINTMENTS, intervenor.

D E C I S I O N

PADILLA, J.:

"nce more the Court is calle# upon to #elineate constitutional boun#aries! $n this petition for

prohibition, the petitioners, %ho are ta&pa'ers, la%'ers, members of the $nte(rate# Bar of

the Philippines an# professors of Constitutional )a%, see* to en+oin the respon#ent

ala#or Mison from performin( the functions of the "ffice of Commissioner of the Bureau

of Customs an# the respon#ent -uillermo Cara(ue, as ecretar' of the Department of

Bu#(et, from effectin( #isbursements in pa'ment of Mison.s salaries an# emoluments, on

the (roun# that Mison.s appointment as Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs is

unconstitutional b' reason of its not hain( been confirme# b' the Commission on

Appointments! /he respon#ents, on the other han#, maintain the constitutionalit' of

respon#ent Mison.s appointment %ithout the confirmation of the Commission on

Appointments!

Because of the #eman#s of public interest, inclu#in( the nee# for stabilit' in the public

serice, the Court resole# to (ie #ue course to the petition an# #eci#e, settin( asi#e the

finer proce#ural 0uestions of %hether prohibition is the proper reme#' to test respon#ent


2/28

Mison.s ri(ht to the "ffice of Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs an# of %hether the

petitioners hae a stan#in( to brin( this suit!

B' the same to*en, an# for the same purpose, the Court allo%e# the Commission on

Appointments to interene an# file a petition in interention! Comment %as re0uire# of

respon#ents on sai# petition! /he comment %as file#, follo%e# b' interenor.s repl' thereto!

/he parties %ere also hear# in oral ar(ument on 8 December 1987!

/his case assumes a##e# si(nificance because, at bottom line, it inoles a conflict

bet%een t%o 23 (reat #epartments of (oernment, the E&ecutie an# )e(islatie

Departments! $t also occurs earl' in the life of the 1987 Constitution!

/he tas* of the Court is ren#ere# li(hter b' the e&istence of relatiel' clear proisions in the

Constitution! $n cases li*e this, %e follo% %hat the Court, spea*in( throu(h Mr! 4ustice later,

Chief 4ustice3 4ose Aba# antos state# in Gold Creek Mining Corp. vs. Rodriguez , 1 that5

/he fun#amental principle of constitutional construction is to (ie effect to the intent of the

framers of the or(anic la% an# of the people a#optin( it! /he intention to %hich force is to be

(ien is that %hich is embo#ie# an# e&presse# in the constitutional proisions themseles!

/he Court %ill thus construe the applicable constitutional proisions, not in accor#ance %ith

ho% the e&ecutie or the le(islatie #epartment ma' %ant them construe#, but in

accor#ance %ith %hat the' sa' an# proi#e!

ection 16, Article $$ of the 1987 Constitution sa's5

/he Presi#ent shall nominate an#, %ith the consent of the Commission on Appointments,

appoint the hea#s of the e&ecutie #epartments, ambassa#ors, other public ministers an#

consuls, or officers of the arme# forces from the ran* of colonel or naal captain, an# other

officers %hose appointments are este# in him in this Constitution! e shall also appoint all

other officers of the -oernment %hose appointments are not other%ise proi#e# for b' la%,

an# those %hom he ma' be authorie# b' la% to appoint! /he Con(ress ma', b' la%, est

the appointment of other officers lo%er in ran* in the Presi#ent alone, in the courts, or in the

hea#s of the #epartments, a(encies, commissions or boar#s!

/he Presi#ent shall hae the po%er to ma*e appointments #urin( the recess of the

Con(ress, %hether oluntar' or compulsor', but such appointments shall be effectie onl'

until #isapproal b' the Commission on Appointments or until the ne&t a#+ournment of the

Con(ress!


3/28

$t is rea#il' apparent that un#er the proisions of the 1987 Constitution, +ust 0uote#, there

are four :3 (roups of officers %hom the Presi#ent shall appoint! /hese four :3 (roups, to

%hich %e %ill hereafter refer from time to time, are5

First , the hea#s of the e&ecutie #epartments, ambassa#ors, other public ministers an#

consuls, officers of the arme# forces from the ran* of colonel or naal captain, an# other

officers %hose appointments are este# in him in this Constitution; &

Seond , all other officers of the -oernment %hose appointments are not other%ise

proi#e# for b' la%; '

!"ird , those %hom the Presi#ent ma' be authorie# b' la% to appoint;

Fourt", officers lo%er in ran* 4 %hose appointments the Con(ress ma' b' la% est in the

Presi#ent alone!

/he first (roup of officers is clearl' appointe# %ith the consent of the Commission on

Appointments! Appointments of such officers are initiate# b' nomination an#, if the

nomination is confirme# b' the Commission on Appointments, the Presi#ent appoints! (

/he secon#, thir# an# fourth (roups of officers are the present bone of contention! houl#

the' be appointe# b' the Presi#ent %ith or %ithout the consent confirmation3 of the

Commission on Appointments< B' follo%in( the accepte# rule in constitutional an# statutor'

construction that an e&press enumeration of sub+ects e&clu#es others not enumerate#, it

%oul# follo% that onl' those appointments to positions e&pressl' state# in the first (roup

re0uire the consent confirmation3 of the Commission on Appointments! But %e nee# not

rel' solel' on this basic rule of constitutional construction! =e can refer to historical

bac*(roun# as %ell as to the recor#s of the 1986 Constitutional Commission to #etermine,

%ith more accurac', if not precision, the intention of the framers of the 1987 Constitution

an# the people a#optin( it, on %hether the appointments b' the Presi#ent, un#er the

secon#, thir# an# fourth (roups, re0uire the consent confirmation3 of the Commission on

Appointments! A(ain, in this tas*, the follo%in( a#ice of Mr! Chief 4ustice 4! Aba# antos

in Gold Creek is apropos5

$n #eci#in( this point, it shoul# be borne in min# that a constitutional proision must be

presume# to hae been frame# an# a#opte# in the li(ht an# un#erstan#in( of prior an#

e&istin( la%s an# %ith reference to them! >Courts are boun# to presume that the people

a#optin( a constitution are familiar %ith the preious an# e&istin( la%s upon the sub+ects to

%hich its proisions relate, an# upon %hich the' e&press their +u#(ment an# opinion in its

a#option!? #$rr% vs. !ru$& 1@ N!D!, 1@1; 99 N!=!, 769,6 )! R! A!, 762!3 )


4/28

$t %ill be recalle# that, un#er ec! 1, Article $$ of the 19@ Constitution, it is proi#e# that

&&& &&& &&&

@3 /he Presi#ent shall nominate an# %ith the consent of the Commission on Appointments,

shall appoint the hea#s of the e&ecutie #epartments an# bureaus, officers of the arm' from

the ran* of colonel, of the Na' an# Air orces from the ran* of captain or comman#er, an#

all other officers of the -oernment %hose appointments are not herein other%ise proi#e#

for, an# those %hom he ma' be authorie# b' la% to appoint; but the Con(ress ma' b' la%

est the appointment of inferior officers, in the Presi#ent alone, in the courts, or in the hea#s

of #epartments!

:3 /he Presi#ent shall hae the po%er to ma*e appointments #urin( the recess of the

Con(ress, but such appointments shall be effectie onl' until #isapproal b' theCommission on Appointments or until the ne&t a#+ournment of the Con(ress!

&&& &&& &&&

73 , an# %ith the consent of the Commission on Appointments, shall appoint

ambassa#ors, other public ministers an# consuls

Fpon the other han#, the 197@ Constitution proi#es thatG

ection 1! /he Presi#ent shall appoint the hea#s of bureaus an# offices, the officers of the

Arme# orces of the Philippines from the ran* of Bri(a#ier -eneral or Commo#ore, an# all

other officers of /he (oernment %hose appointments are not herein other%ise proi#e# for,

an# those %hom he ma' be authorie# b' la% to appoint! o%eer, the Batasan(

Pambansa ma' b' la% est in the Prime Minister, members of the Cabinet, the E&ecutie

Committee, Courts, ea#s of A(encies, Commissions, an# Boar#s the po%er to appoint

inferior officers in their respectie offices!

/hus, in the 19@ Constitution, almost all presi#ential appointments re0uire# the consent

confirmation3 of the Commission on Appointments! $t is no% a sa# part of our politicalhistor' that the po%er of confirmation b' the Commission on Appointments, un#er the 19@

Constitution, transforme# that commission, man' times, into a enue of >horseGtra#in(? an#

similar malpractices!


5/28

"n the other han#, the 197@ Constitution, consistent %ith the authoritarian pattern in %hich

it %as mol#e# an# remol#e# b' successie amen#ments, place# the absolute po%er of

appointment in the Presi#ent %ith har#l' an' chec* on the part of the le(islature!

-ien the aboe t%o 23 e&tremes, one, in the 19@ Constitution an# the other, in the 197@

Constitution, it is not #ifficult for the Court to state that the framers of the 1987 Constitution

an# the people a#optin( it, struc* a >mi##le (roun#? b' re0uirin( the consent confirmation3

of the Commission on Appointments for the first (roup of appointments an# leain( to the

Presi#ent, %ithout such confirmation, the appointment of other officers, i!e!, those in the

secon# an# thir# (roups as %ell as those in the fourth (roup, i!e!, officers of lo%er ran*!

/he procee#in(s in the 1986 Constitutional Commission support this conclusion! /he

ori(inal te&t of ection 16, Article $$, as propose# b' the Committee on the E&ecutie of the

1986 Constitutional Commission, rea# as follo%s5

ection 16! /he presi#ent shall nominate an#, %ith the consent of a Commission on

Appointment, shall appoint the hea#s of the e&ecutie #epartments an# 'ure$us,

ambassa#ors, other public ministers an# consuls, or officers of the arme# forces from the

ran* of colonel or naal captain an# all other officers of the -oernment %hose

appointments are not other%ise proi#e# for b' la%, an# those %hom he ma' be authorie#

b' la% to appoint! /he Con(ress ma' b' la% est the appointment of inferior officers in the

Presi#ent alone, in the courts, or in the hea#s of #epartments 7 HEmphasis supplie#I!

/he aboe te&t is almost a ver'$ti( cop' of its counterpart proision in the 19@Constitution! =hen the frames #iscusse# on the floor of the Commission the propose# te&t

of ection 16, Article $$, a feelin( %as manifestl' e&presse# to ma*e the po%er of the

Commission on Appointments oer presi#ential appointments more limite# than that hel# b'

the Commission in the 19@ Constitution! /husG

Mr! Rama5 Ma' $ as* that Commissioner Monso# be reco(nie#

/he Presi#ent5 =e %ill call Commissioner Dai#e later!

Mr! Monso#5 =ith the Chair.s in#ul(ence, $ +ust %ant to ta*e a fe% minutes of our time to la'the basis for some of the amen#ments that $ %oul# li*e to propose to the Committee this

mornin(!

&&& &&& &&&


6/28

"n ection 16, I )ould like to suggest t"$t t"e po)er o* t"e Co((ission on Appoint(ents

'e li(ited to t"e dep$rt(ent "e$ds, $('$ss$dors, gener$ls $nd so on 'ut not to t"e levels

o* 'ure$u "e$ds $nd olonels.

&&& &&& &&& * Emphasis supplie#!3

$n the course of the #ebates on the te&t of ection 16, there %ere t%o 23 ma+or chan(es

propose# an# approe# b' the Commission! /hese %ere 13 the e&clusion of the

appointments of "e$ds o* 'ure$us from the re0uirement of confirmation b' the Commission

on Appointments; an# 23 the e&clusion of appointments ma#e un#er the secon#

sentence 9 of the section from the same re0uirement! /he recor#s of the #eliberations of the

Constitutional Commission sho% the follo%in(5

MR! R"MF)"5 $ as* that Commissioner o be reco(nie#

/E PRE$DEN/5 Commissioner o is reco(nie#

MR! "J5 Ma#am Presi#ent, m' propose# amen#ment is on pa(e 7, ection 16, line 26

%hich is to #elete the %or#s >an# bureaus,? an# on line 28 of the same pa(e, to chan(e the

phrase Kcolonel or naal captain to MA4"R -ENERA) "R REAR ADM$RA)! /his last

amen#ment %hich is coGauthore# b' Commissioner #e Castro is to put a perio# !3 after the

%or# ADM$RA), an# on line 29 of the same pa(e, start a ne% sentence %ith5 E A))

A)" APP"$N/, et cetera!

MR! RE-A)AD"5 Ma' %e hae the amen#ments one b' one! /he first propose#

amen#ment is to #elete the %or#s >an# bureaus? on line 26!

MR! "J5 /hat is correct!

MR! RE-A)AD"5 or the benefit of the other Commissioners, %hat %oul# be the

+ustification of the proponent for such a #eletion<

MR! "J5 /he position of bureau #irector is actuall' 0uite lo% in the e&ecutie #epartment,

an# to re0uire further confirmation of presi#ential appointment of hea#s of bureaus %oul#sub+ect them to political influence!

MR! RE-A)AD"5 /he Commissioner.s propose# amen#ment b' #eletion also inclu#es

re(ional #irectors as #istin(uishe# from merel' staff #irectors, because the re(ional

#irectors hae 0uite a plenitu#e of po%ers %ithin the re(ions as #istin(uishe# from staff

#irectors %ho onl' sta' in the office!


7/28

MR! "J5 Les, but the re(ional #irectors are un#er the superision of the staff bureau

#irectors!

&&& &&& &&&

MR! MAAMB"N-5 Ma' $ #irect a 0uestion to Commissioner o< /he Commissioner

propose# an amen#ment to #elete Kan# bureaus on ection 16! =ho %ill then appoint the

bureau #irectors if it is not the Presi#ent<

MR! "J5 $t is still the Presi#ent %ho %ill appoint them but their appointment shall no lon(er

be sub+ect to confirmation b' the Commission on Appointments!

MR! MAAMB"N-5 $n other %or#s, it is in line %ith the same ans%er of Commissioner #e

Castro<

MR! "J5 Les!

MR! MAAMB"N-5 /han* 'ou!

/E PRE$DEN/5 $s this clear no%< =hat is the reaction of the Committee<

&&& &&& &&&

MR! RE-A)AD"5 Ma#am Presi#ent, the Committee feels that this matter shoul# be

submitte# to the bo#' for a ote!

MR! DE CA/R"5 /han* 'ou!

MR! RE-A)AD"5 =e %ill ta*e the amen#ments one b' one! +e )ill *irst vote on t"e

deletion o* t"e p"r$se $nd 'ure$us on line -, su" t"$t $ppoint(ents o* 'ure$u diretors

no longer need on*ir($tion '% t"e Co((ission on Appoint(ent.

ection 16, therefore, %oul# rea#5 K/he Presi#ent shall nominate, an# %ith the consent of a

Commission on Appointments, shall appoint the hea#s of the e&ecutie #epartments,

ambassa#ors! ! ! !

/E PRE$DEN/5 $s there an' ob+ection to #elete the phrase Kan# bureaus. on pa(e 7, line

26< ilence3 /he Chair hears none; the amen#ments is approe#!

&&& &&& &&&


8/28

MR! R"MF)"5 Ma#am Presi#ent!

/E PRE$DEN/5 /he Actin( loor )ea#er is reco(nie#!

/E PRE$DEN/5 Commissioner o is reco(nie#

MR! "J5 Ma#am Presi#ent, this is the thir# propose# amen#ment on pa(e 7, line 28! 1

propose to put a perio# !3 after Kcaptain. an# on line 29, #elete Kan# all. an# substitute it %ith

E A)) A)" APP"$N/ ANL!

MR! RE-A)AD"5 M$d$( President, t"e Co((ittee $epts t"e proposed $(end(ent

'e$use it ($kes it le$r t"$t t"ose ot"er o**iers (entioned t"erein do not "$ve to 'e

on*ir(ed '% t"e Co((ission on Appoint(ents.

MR! DA$DE5 Ma#am Presi#ent!

/E PRE$DEN/5 Commissioner Dai#e is reco(nie#!

&&& &&& &&&

MR! DA$DE5 o %oul# the proponent accept an amen#ment to his amen#ment, so that

after >captain? %e insert the follo%in( %or#s5 AND "/ER "$CER ="E

APP"$N/MEN/ ARE E/ED $N $M $N /$ C"N/$/F/$"N<

R! BERNA5 $t is a little a(ue!

MR! DA$DE5 $n other %or#s, there are positions proi#e# for in the Constitution %hose

appointments are este# in the Presi#ent, as a matter of fact li*e those of the #ifferent

constitutional commissions!

R! BERNA5 /hat is correct! /his list of officials foun# in ection 16 is not an e&clusie list

of those appointments %hich constitutionall' re0uire confirmation of the Commission on

Appointments,

MR! DA$DE5 /hat is the reason $ see* the incorporation of the %or#s $ propose#!

R! BERNA5 =ill Commissioner Dai#e restate his propose# amen#ment<

MR! DA$DE5 After Kcaptain,. a## the follo%in(5 AND "/ER "$CER ="E

APP"$N/MEN/ ARE E/ED $N $M $N /$ C"N/$/F/$"N!


9/28

R! BERNA5 o% about5?AND "/ER "$CER ="E APP"$N/MEN/ REF$RE

C"N$RMA/$"N FNDER /$ C"N/$/F/$"N?<

MR! DA$DE5 Les, Ma#am Presi#ent, that is mo#ifie# b' the Committee!

R! BERNA5 /hat %ill clarif' thin(s!

/E PRE$DEN/5 Does the Committee accept<

MR! RE-A)AD"5 4ust for the recor#, of course, that e&clu#es those officers %hich the

Constitution #oes not re0uire confirmation b' the Commission on Appointments, li*e the

members of the +u#iciar' an# the "mbu#sman!

MR! DA$DE5 /hat is correct! /hat is er' clear from the mo#ification ma#e b'

Commissioner Bernas!

/E PRE$DEN/5 o %e hae no% this propose# amen#ment of Commissioners o an#

Dai#e!

&&& &&& &&&

/E PRE$DEN/5 $s there an' ob+ection to this propose# amen#ment of Commissioners

o an# Dai#e as accepte# b' the Committee< ilence3 /he Chair hears none; the

amen#ment, as amen#e#, is approe# 1 Emphasis supplie#3!

$t is, therefore, clear that appointments to the secon# an# thir# (roups of officers can be

ma#e b' the Presi#ent %ithout the consent confirmation3 of the Commission on

Appointments!

$t is conten#e# b' $(ius uri$e, enator Neptali -onales, that the secon# sentence of

ec! 16, Article $$ rea#in(G

e the Presi#ent3 shall $lso appoint all other officers of the -oernment %hose

appointments are not other%ise proi#e# for b' la% an# those %hom he ma' be authorie#

b' la% to appoint ! ! ! ! Emphasis supplie#3

%ith particular reference to the %or# >also,? implies that the Presi#ent shall >in li*e manner?

appoint the officers mentione# in sai# secon# sentence! $n other %or#s, the Presi#ent shall

appoint the officers mentione# in sai# secon# sentence in the same manner as he appoints


10/28

officers mentione# in the first sentence, that is, b' nomination an# %ith the consent

confirmation3 of the Commission on Appointments!

A(ius uri$e/s reliance on the %or# >also? in sai# secon# sentence is not necessaril'

supportie of the conclusion he arries at! or, as the olicitor -eneral ar(ues, the %or#

>also? coul# mean >in a##ition; as %ell; besi#es, too? =ebster.s $nternational Dictionar', p!

62, 1981 e#ition3 %hich meanin(s coul#, on the contrar', stress that the %or# >also? in sai#

secon# sentence means that the Presi#ent, in $ddition to nominatin( an#, %ith the consent

of the Commission on Appointments, appointin( the officers enumerate# in the first

sentence, can appoint %ithout such consent confirmation3 the officers mentione# in the

secon# sentenceG

Rather than limit the area of consi#eration to the possible meanin(s of the %or# >also? as

use# in the conte&t of sai# secon# sentence, the Court has chosen to #erie si(nificance

from the fact that the first sentence spea*s of nomination b' the Presi#ent an# appointment

b' the Presi#ent %ith the consent of the Commission on Appointments, %hereas, the

secon# sentence spea*s onl' of appointment b' the Presi#ent! An#, this use of #ifferent

lan(ua(e in t%o 23 sentences pro&imate to each other un#erscores a #ifference in

messa(e cone'e# an# perceptions establishe#, in line %ith 4u#(e )earne# an#.s

obseration that >%or#s are not pebbles in alien +u&taposition? but, more so, because the

recor#e# procee#in(s of the 1986 Constitutional Commission clearl' an# e&pressl' +ustif'

such #ifferences!

As a result of the innoations intro#uce# in ec! 16, Article $$ of the 1987 Constitution,there are officers %hose appointments re0uire no confirmation of the Commission on

Appointments, een if such officers ma' be hi(her in ran*, compare# to some officers

%hose appointments hae to be confirme# b' the Commission on Appointments un#er the

first sentence of the same ec! 16, Art! $$! /hus, to illustrate, the appointment of the

Central Ban* -oernor re0uires no confirmation b' the Commission on Appointments, een

if he is hi(her in ran* than a colonel in the Arme# orces of the Philippines or a consul in

the Consular erice!

But these contrasts, %hile initiall' impressie, merel' un#erscore the purposie intention

an# #eliberate +u#(ment of the framers of the 1987 Constitution that, e&cept as to those

officers %hose appointments re0uire the consent of the Commission on Appointments b'

e&press man#ate of the first sentence in ec! 16, Art! $$, appointments of other officers are

left to the Presi#ent %ithout nee# of confirmation b' the Commission on Appointments! /his

conclusion is ineitable, if %e are to presume, as %e must, that the framers of the 1987


11/28

Constitution %ere *no%le#(eable of %hat the' %ere #oin( an# of the foreseeable effects

thereof!

Besi#es, the po%er to appoint is fun#amentall' e&ecutie or presi#ential in character!

)imitations on or 0ualifications of such po%er shoul# be strictl' construe# a(ainst them!

uch limitations or 0ualifications must be clearl' state# in or#er to be reco(nie#! But, it is

onl' in the first sentence of ec! 16, Art! $$ %here it is clearl' state# that appointments b'

the Presi#ent to the positions therein enumerate# re0uire the consent of the Commission on

Appointments!

As to the fourth (roup of officers %hom the Presi#ent can appoint, the interenor

Commission on Appointments un#erscores the thir# sentence in ec! 16, Article $$ of the

1987 Constitution, %hich rea#s5

/he Con(ress ma', b' la%, est the appointment of other officers lo%er in ran* in thePresi#ent $lone, in the courts, or in the hea#s of #epartments, a(encies, commissions, or

boar#s! HEmphasis supplie#I!

an# ar(ues that, since a la% is nee#e# to est the appointment of lo%erGran*e# officers in

the Presi#ent $lone, this implies that, in the absence of such a la%, lo%erGran*e# officers

hae to be appointe# b' the Presi#ent sub+ect to confirmation b' the Commission on

Appointments; an#, if this is so, as to lo%erGran*e# officers, it follo%s that hi(herGran*e#

officers shoul# be appointe# b' the Presi#ent, sub+ect also to confirmation b' the

Commission on Appointments!

/he respon#ents, on the other han#, submit that the thir# sentence of ec! 16, Article $$,

aboe0uote#, merel' #eclares that, as to lo%erGran*e# officers, the Con(ress ma' b' la%

est their appointment in the Presi#ent, in the courts, or in the hea#s of the arious

#epartments, a(encies, commissions, or boar#s in the (oernment! No reason ho%eer is

submitte# for the use of the %or# >alone? in sai# thir# sentence!

/he Court is not impresse# b' both ar(uments! $t is of the consi#ere# opinion, after a

careful stu#' of the #eliberations of the 1986 Constitutional Commission, that the use of the

%or# alone? after the %or# >Presi#ent? in sai# thir# sentence of ec! 16, Article $$ is, more

than an'thin( else, a slip or l$pses in #raftsmanship! $t %ill be recalle# that, in the 19@

Constitution, the follo%in( proision appears at the en# of par! @, section 1 , Article $$

thereof

; but the Con(ress ma' b' la% est the appointment of inferior officers, in the

Presi#ent $lone, in the courts, or in the hea#s of #epartments! HEmphasis supplie#I!


12/28

/he aboe proision in the 19@ Constitution appears imme#iatel' after the proision %hich

ma*es practicall' all presi#ential appointments sub+ect to confirmation b' the Commission

on Appointments, thusG

@! /he Presi#ent shall nominate an# %ith the consent of the Commission on Appointments,

shall appoint the hea#s of the e&ecutie #epartments an# bureaus, officers of the Arm' from

the ran* of colonel, of the Na' an# Air orces from the ran* of captain or comman#er, an#

all other officers of the -oernment %hose appointments are not herein proi#e# for, an#

those %hom he ma' be authorie# b' la% to appoint;

$n other %or#s, since the 19@ Constitution sub+ects, as a (eneral rule, presi#ential

appointments to confirmation b' the Commission on Appointments, the same 19@

Constitution sa% fit, b' %a' of an e&ception to such rule, to proi#e that Con(ress ma',

ho%eer, b' la% est the appointment of inferior officers e0uialent to 11 officers lo%er in

ran*? referre# to in the 1987 Constitution3 in the Presi#ent alone, in the courts, or in the

hea#s of #epartments,

$n the 1987 Constitution, ho%eer, as alrea#' pointe# out, the clear an# e&presse# intent of

its framers %as to e&clu#e presi#ential appointments from confirmation b' the Commission

on Appointments, e&cept appointments to offices e&pressl' mentione# in the first sentence

of ec! 16, Article $$! Conse0uentl', there %as no reason to use in the thir# sentence of

ec! 16, Article $$ the %or# >alone? after the %or# >Presi#ent? in proi#in( that Con(ress

ma' b' la% est the appointment of lo%erGran*e# officers in the Presi#ent alone, or in the

courts, or in the hea#s of #epartments, because the po%er to appoint officers %hom he thePresi#ent3 ma' be authorie# b' la% to appoint is alrea#' este# in the Presi#ent, )it"out

need o* on*ir($tion '% t"e Co((ission on Appoint(ents, in the secon# sentence of the

same ec! 16, Article $$!

/herefore, the thir# sentence of ec! 16, Article $$ coul# hae state# merel' that, in the

case of lo%erGran*e# officers, the Con(ress ma' b' la% est their appointment in the

Presi#ent, in the courts, or in the hea#s of arious #epartments of the (oernment! $n short,

the %or# >alone? in the thir# sentence of ec! 16, Article $$ of the 1987 Constitution, as a

literal import from the last part of par! @, section 1, Article $$ of the 19@ Constitution,

appears to be re#un#ant in the li(ht of the secon# sentence of ec! 16, Article $$! An#, this

re#un#anc' cannot preail oer the clear an# positie intent of the framers of the 1987

Constitution that presi#ential appointments, e&cept those mentione# in the first sentence of

ec! 16, Article $$, are not sub+ect to confirmation b' the Commission on Appointments!


13/28

Comin( no% to the imme#iate 0uestion before the Court, it is ei#ent that the position of

Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs a bureau hea#3 is not one of those %ithin the first

(roup of appointments %here the consent of the Commission on Appointments is re0uire#!

As a matter of fact, as alrea#' pointe# out, %hile the 19@ Constitution inclu#es >hea#s of

bureaus? amon( those officers %hose appointments nee# the consent of the Commissionon Appointments, the 1987 Constitution on the other han#, #eliberatel' e&clu#e# the

position of >hea#s of bureaus? from appointments that nee# the consent confirmation3 of

the Commission on Appointments!

Moreoer, the Presi#ent is e&pressl' authorie# b' la% to appoint the Commissioner of the

Bureau of Customs! /he ori(inal te&t of ec! 61 of Republic Act No! 19@7, other%ise

*no%n as the /ariff an# Customs Co#e of the Philippines, %hich %as enacte# b' the

Con(ress of the Philippines on 22 4une 197, rea#s as follo%s5

61! C"ie* 0**ii$ls o* t"e #ure$u!G/he Bureau of Customs shall hae one chief an# one

assistant chief, to be *no%n respectiel' as the Commissioner hereinafter *no%n as the

KCommissioner.3 an# Assistant Commissioner of Customs, %ho shall each receie an

annual compensation in accor#ance %ith the rates prescribe# b' e&istin( la%s! /he

Assistant Commissioner of Customs shall be appointe# b' the proper #epartment hea#!

ec! 61 of Republic Act No! 19@7, %as amen#e# on 27 "ctober 1972 b' Presi#ential

Decree No! @:, amen#in( the /ariff an# Customs Co#e of the Philippines! ec! 61, as thus

amen#e#, no% rea#s as follo%s5

ec! 61! C"ie* 0**ii$ls o* t"e #ure$u o* Custo(s!G/he Bureau of Customs shall hae one

chief an# one assistant chief, to be *no%n respectiel' as the Commissioner hereinafter

*no%n as Commissioner3 an# Deput' Commissioner of Customs, %ho shall each receie an

annual compensation in accor#ance %ith the rates prescribe# b' e&istin( la%! !"e

Co((issioner $nd t"e Deput% Co((issioner o* Custo(s s"$ll 'e $ppointed '% t"e

President o* t"e P"ilippines Emphasis supplie#!3

"f course, these la%s Rep! Act No! 19@7 an# PD No! @:3 %ere approe# #urin( the

effectiit' of the 19@ Constitution, un#er %hich the Presi#ent ma' nominate an#, %ith the

consent of the Commission on Appointments, appoint the hea#s of bureaus, li*e the

Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs!

After the effectiit' of the 1987 Constitution, ho%eer, Rep! Act No! 19@7 an# PD No! @:

hae to be rea# in harmon' %ith ec! 16, Art! $$, %ith the result that, %hile the appointment

of the Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs is one that #eoles on the Presi#ent, as an


14/28

appointment he is authorie# b' la% to ma*e, such appointment, ho%eer, no lon(er nee#s

the confirmation of the Commission on Appointments!

Conse0uentl', %e rule that the Presi#ent of the Philippines acte# %ithin her constitutional

authorit' an# po%er in appointin( respon#ent ala#or Mison, Commissioner of the Bureau

of Customs, %ithout submittin( his nomination to the Commission on Appointments for

confirmation! e is thus entitle# to e&ercise the full authorit' an# functions of the office an#

to receie all the salaries an# emoluments pertainin( thereto!

+#ERE"ORE, the petition an# petition in interention shoul# be, as the' are,

hereb' DISMISSED! =ithout costs!

SO ORDERED

G.R. No. -4&&) A/s &, 99'

CONC#ITA ROMUALDE01%AP, petitioner,

s!

T#E CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION an2 T#E P#ILIPPINE NATIONAL $AN3, respon#ents!

1stelito P. Mendoz$ *or petitioner.

!"e Soliitor Gener$l *or t"e Civil Servie Co((ission.

Do(ingo A. S$nti$go, Jr. *or P"ilippine 2$tion$l #$nk.

PADILLA, J.:

/his is a special ciil action for ertior$ri un#er Rule 6 of the Rules of Court, assailin( Resolution

No! 92G21 of the respon#ent Ciil erice Commission, %hich uphel# the petitioners separation


15/28

from the Philippine National Ban*PNB3 as a result of the abolition of the un# /ransfer Department

pursuant to a reor(aniation un#er E&ecutie "r#er No! 8, #ate# @ December 1986!

Petitioner Conchita Romual#eGLap starte# %or*in( %ith the Philippine National Ban* on 2

eptember 1972 as special assistant %ith the ran* of econ# Assistant Mana(er assi(ne# to the

office of the PNB Presi#ent! After seeral promotions, she %as appointe# in 198@ enior icePresi#ent assi(ne# to the un# /ransfer Department!

tartin( 1 April 1986 up to 2 ebruar' 1987, petitioner file# seeral applications for leae of

absence #ue to me#ical reasons3 %hich %ere #ul' approe#! =hile she %as on leae, E&ecutie

"r#er No! 8 Reise# Charter of the PNB3 %as approe# on @ December 1986! ai# e&ecutie

or#er authorie# the restructureOreor(aniation an# rehabilitation of PNB! Pursuant to the

reor(aniation plan, the un# /ransfer Department %as abolishe# an# its functions transferre# to the

$nternational Department!

Conse0uentl', petitioner %as notifie# of her separation from the serice in a letter #ate# @ 4anuar'

1987, thus5

Pursuant to the /ransitor' Proision of the 1986 Reise# Charter of the Ban*, please

be informe# that Mana(ement has approe# 'our sep$r$tion *ro( t"e

servie effectie ebruar' 16, 1986! Lou shall be entitle# to the re(ular benefits

allo%e# un#er e&istin( la%! emphasis supplie#3

Please be informe# further that un#er ec! @7 of the Ban*s 1986 Reise# Charter,

an' officer or emplo'ee %ho feels a((riee# b' an' matter treate# aboe ma' submit

his case to the Ciil erice

Commission!

/his letter %as receie# b' petitioners secretar' at the PNB hea# office on 16 ebruar' 1987!

Petitioners first recor#e# appeal to the Ciil erice Commission 0uestionin( her separation is a

letter #ate# : Au(ust 1989! /hen CC Chairman amilo N! Barlon(a' uphel# the ali#it' of her

separation from the serice in a letterOopinion #ate# @ Au(ust 1989 this %as alle(e#l' receie# b'

petitioner onl' on 26 ebruar' 1993 statin( thus5

&&& &&& &&&

$t ma' be mentione# in this connection, that inasmuch as 'ou #i# not aail of the

ER$POupplementar' Retirement Plans a#opte# b' the PNB in 1986, 'ou haetherefore lost 'our ri(ht thereto! Moreoer, since 'ou lac* the re0uire# number of

'ears of serice to entitle 'ou to retirement benefits un#er e&istin( la%s, 'ou ma' be

entitle# to the return of 'our -$ personal contributions! Consi#erin( further that

'ou hae e&hauste# all 'our accumulate# leae cre#its as 'ou %ent on leae of

absence for the perio# from April 1, 1986 to ebruar' 2, 1987, there is no le(al or

ali# basis to entitle 'ou to pa'ment of terminal leae!


16/28

inall', pursuant to ection 16, Article $$$ of the /ransitor' Proisions of the 1987

Philippine Constitution, 'ou ma' be entitle# to pa'ment of separation sub+ect to

au#itin( rules an# re(ulations! &

$n her motion for reconsi#eration %ith the Ciil erice Commission, #ate# March 199,

0uestionin( Chairman Barlon(a's rulin(, petitioner claime#5

1! /he opinionOrulin( %as not full' supporte# b' the ei#ence on recor#;

2! Errors of la% pre+u#icial to the interest of the moant hae been committe#! he ar(ue#5

! ! ! that her separation from the serice %as ille(al an# %as #one in ba# faith

consi#erin( that her termination on Fe'ru$r% 3, 345 %as ma#e effectie prior to

the effectiit' of E&ecutie "r#er No! 8 on Dee('er 6, 345 , %hich la% authorie#

the reor(aniation of the PNB, an# een before ebruar' 2, 1986, %hen Presi#ent

Coraon C! A0uino came into po%er! he further claims that althou(h the notice of

termination %as #ate# 4anuar' @, 1987 it %as onl' sere# upon her on ebruar' 16,1987 %hen the ne% Constitution %hich (uarantees securit' of tenure to public

emplo'ees %as alrea#' in effect! '

&&& &&& &&&

! ! ! the ba# faith in her separation from the serice in 1987 %as ei#ent from the

recent restoration of the un# /ransfer Department as a separate an# #istinct unit

from the $nternational Department ! ! !4

Den'in( the motion for reconsi#eration, the Ciil erice Commission in its aforecite# Resolution No!

92G21, #ate# @ 4anuar', 1992, rule#5

ec! @@ of E" 8 1986 Reise# Charter of the PNB3 proi#es5

ec! @@! Aut"orit% to Reorg$nize! $n ie% of re#uce# operations contemplate#

un#er this charter in pursuance of the national polic' e&presse# in the Q=hereasQ

clause hereof, a reor(aniation of the Ban* an# a re#uction in force are hereb'

authorie# to achiee (reater efficienc' an# econom' in operations, inclu#in( the

a#option of a ne% staffin( pattern to suit the re#uce# operations enisione#! /he

pro(ram of reor(aniation shall be(in imme#iatel' after the approal of this "r#er,

an# shall be complete# %ithin si& 63 months an# shall be full' implemente# %ithin

ei(hteen 183 months thereafter!Q Clearl'; as afore0uote#, PNB %as authorie# toun#er(o reor(aniation an# to effect a re#uction in force to Qachiee (reater

efficienc' an# econom' in operationsQ! $t cannot, be #ispute# that re#uction in force

necessitates, amon( others, the abolition of positionsOoffices! /he recor#s sho% that

prior to its reor(aniation, PNB ori(inall' ha# 7,@7 positions %hich %ere re#uce# to

,: after the reor(aniation! $n#ee#, 2,1@2 positions %ere abolishe#, that is, the

ori(inal positions in PNB %ere re#uce# b' 28! /his re#uction in force li*e%ise

inclu#e# the senior officer positions, in PNB, %hich %ere re#uce#, thus5


17/28

Positions Inu('ents Proposed Position

Presi#ent 1 1 1

r! E&ec! P 1 1

E&ec! P @ 2 2

enior P 12 11 7ice Pres! @@ 27 1

/he position of moant Lap P3 %as one amon( the ori(inal t%ele 123 P

positions! $t %as one amon( the fie 3 P positions %hich %ere abolishe#! $n fact,

the /D of %hich she %as then the incumbent P, %as mer(e# %ith the

$nternational Department to %hich its functions %ere close#l' relate#!

$t shoul# be note# that as rule# b' the upreme Court in Dario s! Mison -!R! N"!

819:35

Reor(aniations in this +uris#iction hae been re(ar#e# as ali#proi#e# the' are pursue# in (oo# faith! As a (eneral rule, a

reor(aniation is carrie# out in Q(oo# faithQ if it is for the purpose of

econom' or to ma*e bureaucrac' more efficient! $n that eent, no

#ismissal or separation actuall' occurs because the position itself

ceases to e&ist! An# in that case, securit' of tenure %oul# not be a

Chinese =all! ! ! ! !

! ! ! -oo# faith, as a component of a reor(aniation un#er a

constitutional re(ime is +u#(e# from the facts of each case!

$n the instant case, therefore, this Commission is incline# to beliee that thereor(aniation of PNB %as #one in (oo# faith! or in#ee#, the reor(aniation %as

pursue# to achiee econom'! $t un#ertoo* re#uction in force as a means to

streamline the numbers of the %or*force! $t %as inci#ental that moant Laps position

%as one amon( those abolishe#! Moant Lap faile# to substantiate her claim b'

clear an# conincin( ei#ence that the abolition of her position %as a result of her

close i#entification %ith the preious re(ime, bein( a sister of former irst )a#'

$mel#a Romual#e Marcos! /his bein( so, an# pursuant to the presumption of

re(ularit' in the performance of official functions, the abolition of moant Laps

position shoul# be uphel#! PNB, in the instant case, has clearl' proe# b' substantial

ei#ence that its act in terminatin( the serices of some of its emplo'ees %as #one in

(oo# faith!(

"errulin( her imputation of ba# faith, i!e! her separation %as ille(al because it too* effect on 16

ebruar' 1986 or een before the promul(ation of E" No! 8 on @ December 1986, the CC note#

that the 'ear Q1986Q state# in the notice of her separation from the serice %as a t'po(raphical error!

PNB submitte# #ocuments p! 6 of Resolution No! 92G213 supportin( its stan# that the separation

actuall' too* effect on 16 ebruar' 3457 !


18/28

"n the issue of ba# faith as relate# to the later restoration of the un# /ransfer Department, the

sub+ect CC resolution a##s5

&&& &&& &&&

$t ma' be mentione# that the recent restoration of the un# /ransfer Department,actuall' %as a mer(er of the un# /ransfer -roup, the orei(n Remittance

Deelopment an# Coor#inatin( Fnit base# on boar# Resolution No! 6 of March 12,

1991, or after the lapse of oer four :3 'ears from the #ate it %as abolishe# in 1987!

Moreoer, the restoration of the un# /ransfer Department an# other offices in the

PNB %as primaril' cause# b' the improe# financial capabilit' an# present nee#s of

the Ban*! /his improe# financial con#ition of the PNB is ei#ent from the 199

Annual Report it submitte#! $t ma' be further state# that the reGestablishe# /D is

hea#e# b' a ice Presi#ent, a position much lo%er in ran* than the former

#epartment hea#e# b' a enior ice Presi#ent!

urthermore, it shoul# be note# that (rantin( $rguendo that moant Laps terminationfrom the serice %as tainte# %ith ba# faith, she ho%eer, is no% barre# from

assailin( the same as she #i# not seasonabl' assert her ri(ht thereto! Recor#s sho%

that she %as separate# from PNB on ebruar' 16, 1987 an# it %as onl' in 1989 or

about 2 'ears thereafter %hen she brou(ht this matter to this Commission! B' her

inaction in 0uestionin( her termination %ithin a perio# of one 'ear, she is consi#ere#

to hae ac0uiesce# to her separation from the serice an# aban#one# her ri(ht to

the position! )

$n the present petition before the Court, the follo%in( issues are raise#5

1! E&istence of ba# faith in the reor(aniation of the Philippine National Ban* resultin( in theseparation from the serice of petitioner!

2! Erroneous application of the D$rio v ! Mison #octrine vis8$8vis PNBs reor(aniation!

@! Erroneous application of the one 13 'ear prescriptie perio# for 9uo )$rr$nto procee#in(s in

petitioners case!

D$rio v ! Mison 7 lai# #o%n the re0uirement of (oo# faith in the reor(aniation of a (oernment bureau

%herein offices are abolishe#! $t sa's5

! ! ! Reor(aniations in this +uris#iction hae been re(ar#e# as ali# proi#e# the' arepursue# in (oo# faith! As a (eneral rule, a reor(aniation is carrie# out in Q(oo# faithQ

if it is for the purpose of econom' or to ma*e bureaucrac' more efficient! $n that

eent, no #ismissal in case of #ismissal3 or separation actuall' occurs because the

position itself ceases to e&ist! An# in that case, securit' of tenure %oul# not be a

Chinese %all! Be that as it ma', if the Qabolition,Q %hich is nothin( else but a

separation or remoal, is #one for political reasons or purposel' to #efeat securit' of

tenure, or other%ise not in (oo# faith, no ali# QabolitionQ ta*es place an# %hateer


19/28

QabolitionQ is #one, is oi# ab initio! /here is an inali# QabolitionQ as %here there is

merel' a chan(e of nomenclature of positions, or %here claims of econom' are

belie# b' the e&istence of ample fun#s! $t is to be stresse# that b' pre#isposin( a

reor(aniation to the 'ar#stic* of (oo# faith, %e are not, as a conse0uence, imposin(

a QcauseQ for restructurin(! Retrenchment in the course of a reor(aniation in (oo#

faith is still remoal Qnot for causeQ if b' QcauseQ %e refer to Q(roun#sQ or con#itionsthat call for #isciplinar' action! -oo# faith, as a component of a reor(aniation un#er

a constitutional re(ime, is +u#(e# from the facts of each case!

$n Petitioners case, the follo%in( instances are cite# b' her as in#icia of ba# faith5

1! /he abolishe# #epartment %as later restore# an# the number of senior ice

presi#ents %as increase#!

2! PNB #i# not follo% the prescribe# se0uence of separation of emplo'ees from the

serice containe# in Rep! Act No! 666 %hich is5

ec! @! $n the separation of personnel pursuant to reor(aniation, the

follo%in( or#er of remoal shall be follo%e#5

a3 Casual emplo'ees %ith less than fie 3 'ears of

(oernment serice;

b3 Casual emplo'ees %ith fie 3 'ears or more of

(oernment serice;

c3 Emplo'ees hol#in( temporar' appointments; an#

#3 Emplo'ees hol#in( permanent

appointments5 Provided , /hat those in the same

cate(or' as enumerate# aboe, %ho are least

0ualifie# in terms of performance an# merit shall be

lai# off first, len(th of serice not%ithstan#in(!

@! Petitioner %as not e&ten#e# preference in appointment to the positions in the ne%

staffin( pattern as man#ate# b' ec! : of Rep! Act 666, her 0ualification an# fitness

for ne% positions %ere neer ealuate# or consi#ere# in iolation of ec! 27 of P!D!

87 %hich %as incorporate# as ec! 29 Ch! ubtitle A, Boo* of the A#ministratie

Co#e of 1987!

:! )ac* of notice an# bearin( before separation from the serice!

! Petitioner %as force# to ta*e a leae of absence an# preente# from reportin( for

%or*!


20/28

6! /here is a #iscrepanc' in the #ate of her separation from the serice an# the

effectiit' thereof!

7! PNB emplo'ees in the un# /ransfer Department i#entifie# %ith her %ere

reassi(ne# or froen!

8! he is liste# as hain( resi(ne# instea# of bein( separate# or #ismisse# %hich

%as %hat actuall' happene#!

9! /he #ismissal %as politicall' motiate#, she bein( a sister of Mrs! $mel#a

Romual#e Marcos, %ife of #epose# Presi#ent er#inan# Marcos!

E&ecutie "r#er No! 8 conferre# upon the PNB the authorit' to reor(anie! /he or#er %as issue#

b' then Pres! Coraon A0uino on @ December 1986 %hile she %as e&ercisin( the po%ers este# in

the Presi#ent of the Philippines b' the ree#om Constitution! After @ December 1986, %hat

remaine# to be #one %as the implementation of the reor(aniation! /here is no #oubt as to the le(al

basis for PNBs reor(aniation! /he real 0uestion is5 %as it #one in (oo# faith, teste# b' the D$riov ! Mison #octrine<

/o start %ith it is almost absur# for petitioner to insist that her termination from the serice %as

ante#ate# to 3 Fe'ru$r% 345 ! At that time, the reor(aniation of PNB ha# not een been

conceie#! $n most of PNBs plea#in(s, it has #ocumente# an# supporte# its stan# that the 'ear of

petitioners separation is 1987 not 1986! /he ante#atin( of the termination #ate, asi#e from bein(

clearl' a t'po(raphical error, is a periphernal issue! /he real issue is e&istence of ba# faith consistin(

of tan(ible bureaucraticOmana(ement pressures e&erte# to ease her out of office! Ba# faith has been

#efine# as a state of min# affirmatiel' operatin( %ith furtie #esi(n or %ith some motie of self

interest or ill %ill or for an ulterior purpose! * $t is the performance of an act %ith the *no%le#(e that the

actor is iolatin( the fun#amental la% or ri(ht, een %ithout %illful intent to in+ure or purposie malice toperpetrate a #amnif'in( harm! 9

PNBs reor(aniation, to repeat, %as b' irtue of a ali# la%! At the time of reor(aniation, #ue to the

critical financial situation of the ban*, #epartments, positions an# functions %ere abolishe# or

mer(e#! /he abolition of the un# /ransfer Department /D3 %as dee(ed neess$r% ! /his, to the

Courts min#, %as a mana(ement prero(atie e&ercise# pursuant to a business +u#(ment! At this

point, a #istinction can be ma#e in rulin( on the ali#it' of a reor(aniation bet%een a (oernment

bureau or office performin( constituent functions li*e the Customs3 an# a (oernmentGo%ne# or

controlle# corporation performin( ministrant functions li*e the PNB3!

Constituent function are those %hich constitute the er' bon#s of societ' an# are compulsor' innature; ministrant functions are those un#erta*en b' %a' of a#ancin( the (eneral interests of

societ', an# are merel' optional! Commercial or uniersal ban*in( is, i#eall', not a (oernmental but

a priate sector, en#eaor! $t is an optional function of (oernment!

! ! ! /he principles #eterminin( %hether or not a (oernment shall e&ercise certain of

these optional functions are5 13 that a (oernment shoul# #o for the public %elfare

those thin(s %hich priate capital %oul# not naturall' un#erta*e an# 23 that a


21/28

(oernment shoul# #o those thin(s %hich b' its er', nature it is better e0uippe# to

a#minister for the public %elfare than is an' priate in#ii#ual or (roup of in#ii#uals

M$lol(, !"e Govern(ent o* t"e P"ilippine Isl$nds, pp! 19G23

rom the aboe %e ma' infer that, strictl' spea*in(, there are functions %hich our

(oernment is re0uire# to e&ercise to promote its ob+ecties as e&presse# in ourConstitution an# %hich are e&ercise# b' it as an attribute of soerei(nt', an# those

%hich it ma' e&ercise to promote merel' the %elfare, pro(ress an# prosperit' of the

people! /o this latter class belon(s the or(aniation of those corporations o%ne# or

controlle# b' the (oernment to promote certain aspects of the economic life of our

people such as the National Coconut Corporation! /hese are %hat %e call

(oernmentGo%ne# or controlle# corporations %hich ma' ta*e on the form of a

priate enterprise or one or(anie# %ith po%ers an# formal characteristics of a

priate corporation un#er the Corporation )a%! Bacani s! Nacoco, No, )G967,

Noember 29, 196, 1 Phil! :683

But a reor(aniation %hether in a (oernment bureau performin( constituent functions or in a(oernmentGo%ne# or controlle# corporation performin( ministrant functions must meet a common

test, the test of (oo# faith! $n this connection, the philosoph' behin# PNBs reor(aniation is spelle#

out in the %hereas clauses of E&ecutie "r#er No! 85

=EREA, %ithin the conte&t of the (eneral polic' there neertheless e&ists a clear

role for #irect (oernmentGparticipation in the ban*in( s'stem, particularl' in

sericin( the re0uirements of a(riculture, small an# me#ium scale in#ustr', e&port

#eelopment, an# the (oernment sector!

=EREA, in pursuit of this national polic' there is nee# to restructure the

(oernment financial institutions, particularl' the Philippine National Ban*, to achieea more efficient an# effectie use of aailable scarce resources, to improe its

iabilit', an# to aoi# unfair competition %ith the priate sector, an#

=EREA, the reor(aniation an# rehabilitation of the Philippine National Ban* into

a similar but stron(er an# more operationall' iable ban* is an important component

of the nationaliation pro(rams for both the financial s'stem an# the (oernment

corporation sector; ! ! ! !

=hether there %as a hi##en political a(en#a to persecute petitioner #ue to her consan(uinial

relation to Mrs! $mel#a Romual#e Marcos, the %i#o% of former Presi#ent Marcos, is not clearl'

sho%n! "n the other han#, it is entirel' possible that, precisel' because of such consan(uinialrelation, petitioner ma' hae been the ob+ect of #eferential, if not special treatment un#er the Marcos

re(ime! $t is part of the ilipino culture to e&ten# such #eferential, if not special treatment to close

relaties of persons in po%er! Man' times this is carrie# to un%holesome e&tremes! But a

#iscontinuance of such #eferential or special treatment in the %a*e of a chan(e in (oernment or

a#ministration is not ba# faith per se! $t ma' be merel' puttin( thin(s in their proper places!


22/28

Due to the restructurin( an# this is empiricall' erifiable PNB became once more a iable

ban*in( institution! /he restoration of the /D four 'ears after it %as abolishe# an# its functions

transferre# to the $nternational Department, can be attribute# to the ban*s (ro%th after

reor(aniations, thereb' ne(atin( malice or ba# faith in that reor(aniation! /he essence of (oo#

faith lies in an honest belief in the ali#it' of ones ri(ht! - $t consists of an honest intention to abstain

from ta*in( an unconscionable an# unscrupulous a#anta(e of another, its absence shoul# beestablishe# b' conincin( ei#ence!

/he recor#s also clearl' in#icate that startin( April 1986 to ebruar' 1987, petitioner %ent on leae

of absence for me#ical reasons! =hile she %as not reportin( to the office, the ban*s reor(aniation

(ot un#er%a'! he continue#, ho%eer, receiin( her salaries, allo%ances, emoluments, honoraria

an# fees up to March 1987! Emplo'ees %ho %ere affecte# b' the reor(aniation ha# the option to

aail of the ban*s eparation Benefits PlanOEarl' Retirement Plan BPOER$P3! Petitioner opte# not

to aail of such plan an# instea# submitte# to the result of the ban*s on(oin( reor(aniation an#

mana(ements #iscretion! $f petitioner ha# the #esire for continue# emplo'ment %ith the ban*, she

coul# hae asserte# it for mana(ements consi#eration! /here is no proof on recor# that she

affirmatiel' e&presse# %illin(ness to be emplo'e#! ince she cannot rebut the CC fin#in( that her

earliest appeal %as ma#e on : Au(ust 1989, there is no reason for this Court to hol# that she #i# not

sleep on her ri(hts! "n the contrar', her present ar(ument that ba# faith e&iste# at the time of the

abolition of the /D because it %as restore# four 'ears later is a little too late! =ho coul# hae

pre#icte# in 1986 or 1987 that PNB %oul# be able to rise from its financial crisis an# become a

iable commercial ban* a(ain< /he #ecision to abolish the /D at the time it %as abolishe#, to

repeat, %as a business +u#(ment ma#e in (oo# faith!

PNB for its part submits that its reor(aniation %as effecte# in (oo# faith

because

a3 /here %as not onl' a perceptible but substantial restructurin( of the PNB hierarch'

sho%in( re#uction of personnel, consoli#ation of offices an# abolition of positions!

b3 /%o thousan# one hun#re# thirt' t%o 2,1@23 positions %ere abolishe# #urin( the

perio# from ebruar' 16, 1986 to 4anuar' 1:, 1987 leain( a lean %or*force of fie

thousan# four hun#re# fie ,:3 as of latter #ate per B!R! No! @: hereto attache#

as Anne& QRQ!

c3 /he number of senior officers, inclu#in( enior ice Presi#ents, %as accor#in(l'

re#uce#!

Another issue raise# b' petitioner is PNBs alle(e# nonGcompliance %ith the man#ate of ections 2an# : of Rep! Act No! 666! /hese ections proi#e5

ec! 2! No officer or emplo'ee in the career serice shall be remoe# e&cept for a

ali# cause an# after #ue notice an# hearin(! A ali# cause for remoal e&ists %hen,

pursuant to a bona fi#e reor(aniation, a position has been abolishe# or ren#ere#

re#un#ant or there is a nee# to mer(e, #ii#e, or consoli#ate positions in or#er to

meet the e&i(encies of the serice, or other la%ful causes allo%e# b' the Ciil


23/28

erice )a%! /he e&istence of an' or some of the follo%in( circumstances ma' be

consi#ere# as ei#ence of ba# faith in the remoals ma#e as a result of

reor(aniation, (iin( to a claim for reinstatement or reappointment b' an a((riee#

part'!

a3 =here there is a si(nificant increase in the number of positions in the ne% staffin(pattern of the #epartment or a(enc' concerne#;

b3 =here an office is abolishe# an# another performin( substantiall' the same

functions is create#;

c3 =here incumbents are replace# b' those less 0ualifie# in terms of status of

appointment, performance an# merit;

#3 =here there is a reclassification of offices in the #epartment or a(enc' concerne#

an# the reclassifie# offices perform substantiall' the same functions as the ori(inal

offices;

e3 =here the remoal iolates the or#er of separation proi#e# in ection @ hereof!

&&& &&& &&&

ec! :! "fficers an# emplo'ees hol#in( permanent, appointments shall be (ien

preference for appointment to the ne% position in the approe# staffin( pattern

comparable to their former positions or in case there are not enou(h comparable

positions, to positions ne&t lo%er in ran*!

No ne% emplo'ees shall be ta*en in until all permanent officers an# emplo'ees haebeen appointe#, inclu#in( temporar' an# casual emplo'ees %ho possess the

necessar' 0ualification re0uirements, amon( %hich is the appropriate ciil serice

eli(ibilit', for permanent appointment to positions in the approe# staffin( pattern, in

case there are still positions to be fille#, unless such positions are polic'G#eterminin(,

primaril' confi#ential or hi(hl' technical in nature!

$n the first place, Rep! Act No! 666 cannot be ino*e# b' petitioner because it too* effect on 1

4une 1987, or after PNBs reor(aniation ha# alrea#' been implemente#! But assumin(, e& gr$ti$

$rgu(enti , that it is applicable here an# petitioner must be accor#e# preferential ri(ht to appointment

in the ban*, PNB in its re+oin#er impressiel' asserts5

Nee#less to sa', there %ere arious committees that %ere create# in the

implementation of the or(aniational restructurin( of the Ban* base# on the

fore(oin( polic' (ui#elines! Each personnel to be retaine# %as ealuate# in terms of

relatie fitness an# merit alon( %ith the other personnel of the Ban*! /hus, %hen

then P e#erico Pascual %as chosen to hea# the $nternational Department from

amon( other officers of the Ban*, inclu#in( Ms! Lap, his 0ualifications far e&cee#e#

those of the other can#i#ates for the position!


24/28

=e attach hereto as Anne&es Q-G1Q an# Q-G2Q the serice recor#s of Mr! e#erico

Pascual an# Petitioner Ms! Lap, respectiel', %hich clearl' sho% that the

0ualifications of Mr! Pascual far e&cee# those of Petitioner Lap! Asi#e from bein( a

la%'er hain( been a la% (ra#uate from the Fniersit' of the Philippines, he is also a

Bachelor of Arts #e(ree hol#er from Ateneo #e Manila an# a Master of )a%s

(ra#uate o Columbia )a% chool! e ha# stu#ie# Masteral Arts in Public A#ministration at the )on#on chool of Economics an# ha# un#er(one e&tensie

seminars since 197: at the $nternational Department an# ha# been assi(ne# in

seeral forei(n branches of the Ban*! Before he resi(ne# from the Ban*, he hel# the

secon# hi(hest position of E&ecutie ice Presi#ent an# sere# as Actin( Presi#ent

of the Ban* before the incumbent presi#ent, Presi#ent -abriel in(son assume# his

position!

"n the other han#, the serice recor# of Petitioner Lap %ill sho% that she onl' hol#s

a Bachelor of cience in Commerce De(ree from Assumption Conent an# has

un#er(one onl' one seminar on Mana(ement an# )ea#ersbip /rainin( Pro(ram! he

entere# the Ban* serice in 1972! Rollo at pp! @12 to @1@3

&&& &&& &&&

/he pra'er in the petition at bar see*s petitioners imme#iate reinstatement to her former position as

senior ice presi#ent an# hea# of the un# /ransfer Department, or reappointment to a position of

comparable or e0uialent ran* %ithout loss of seniorit' ri(hts an# pa', etc!, un#er the ban*s ne%

staffin( pattern!

A person claimin( to be entitle# to a public office or position usurpe# or unla%full' hel# or e&ercise#

b' another ma' brin( an action for 9uo )$rr$nto Rule 66, ec! 6, Rules of Court3! /he petitioner

therein must sho% a clear le(al ri(ht to the office alle(e#l' hel# unla%full' b' another!&

An action for 9uo )$rr$nto shoul# be brou(ht %ithin one 13 'ear after ouster from office; ' the failure

to institute the same %ithin the re(lementar' perio# constitutes more than a sufficient basis for its

#ismissal 4 since it is not proper that the title to a public office be sub+ecte# to continue#

uncertaint' ! ! ! ( An e&ception to this prescriptie perio# lies onl' if the failure to file the action can be

attribute# to the acts of a responsible (oernment officer an# not of the #ismisse# emplo'ee! )

Measure# b' the aboe +urispru#ence, petitioners action ma' be sai# to be one for 9uo )$rr$nto,

see*in( reinstatement to her former position %hich at present is occupie# b' another! he cannot

ino*e De !$ver$ v !P"il ! !u'erulosis Soiet%, In !, et ! $l ! 7 an# conten# that there is no claim of

usurpation of office, an# that 9uo )$rr$ntoma' be aaile# of to assert ones ri(ht to an office in the

situation obtainin( in the case at bar!

S$ntos v ! CA, et ! $l ! * an# M$gno v ! P22C Corp! 9 are ino*e# b' petitioner to illustrate that this action

is one for separation %ithout +ust cause, hence, the prescriptie perio# is alle(e#l' four :3 'ears in

accor#ance %ith Article 11:6 of the Ciil Co#e! &- =e #o not a(ree! Petitioners separation from the

serice %as #ue to the abolition of her office in implementation of a ali# reor(aniation! /his is not the

un+ustifiable cause %hich results in in+ur' to the ri(hts of a person contemplate# b' Article 11:6! /he

abolition of the office %as not a %himsical, thou(htless moe! $t %as a thorou(hl' ealuate# action for


25/28

streamlinin( functions base# on a rehabilitation plan! & At the time of the abolition of the un# /ransfer

Department in 1986, forei(n e&chan(e losses of the ban* amounte# to P81!1 Million! && /he hea# of office

%as a enior ice Presi#ent! At the time of restoration of the #epartment in 1991, it %as hea#e# b' a ice

presi#ent lo%er in ran*3 an# sho%e# earnin(s of P2,62! Million! &' "ther #epartments abolishe# in

1986 %ere also subse0uentl' restore#!

Restorin( petitioner to her preious position %ith bac*%a(es %oul# be un+ust enrichment to her,

consi#erin( that she ha# aban#one# or sho%e# lac* of interest in reclaimin( the same position %hen

the ban* %as not 'et full' rehabilitate# an# she onl' insiste# on reinstatement in Au(ust 1989 or t%o

23 'ears after her alle(e# un+ustifie# separation!

/o those %ho feel that their un+ustifie# separation from the serice is for a cause be'on# their

control, the aforecite# M$gno $se teaches5

! ! ! %hile =e full' reco(nie the special protection %hich the Constitution, labor la%s,

an# social le(islation accor# the %or*in(man, =e cannot, ho%eer, alter or amen#

the la% on prescription to reliee him of the conse0uences of his inaction!

i(ilantibus, non #ormientibus, +ura subeniunt )a%s come to the assistance of the

i(ilant, not of the sleepin(3! is e&planation that he coul# not hae file# the

complaint earlier because Qhe %as preente# to #o so be'on# his control for the

simple reason that priate respon#ent hae sic3 trie# to circument the la% b'

merel' floatin(Q him is er' flims' an# #oes not een eo*e s'mpathetic

consi#eration, if at all it is proper an# necessar'! =e note that petitioner herein is not

an unlettere# man; he seems to be e#ucate# an# assertie of his ri(hts an# appears

to be familiar %ith +u#icial proce#ures! e file# a motion for e&tension of time to file

the petition an# the petition itself %ithout the assistance of counsel! =e cannot

beliee that if in#ee# he ha# a ali# (rieance a(ainst PNCC he %oul# not hae

ta*en imme#iate positie steps for its re#ress!

=ERE"RE, premises consi#ere#, the assaile# CC resolution is A$RMED! /he petition is

D$M$ED for failure to sho% (rae abuse of #iscretion on the part of sai# CC in ren#erin( the

0uestione# resolution! No pronouncement as to costs!

" "RDERED!

G.R. NO. L1)9'7 A/s (, 9*)

"ELIMON LUEGO, petitionerGappellant,

s!

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION an2 "ELICULA TUO0O, respon#entsGappellees!


26/28

Jose #$ti9uin *or petitioner8$ppell$nt.

F$usto F. !ug$de *or priv$te respondent8$ppellee.

CRU0, J.:

trippe# of irreleant #etails an# impertinent inci#ents that hae cluttere# the oluminous recor#, the

facts of this case ma' be briefl' narrate# as follo%s5

/he petitioner %as appointe# A#ministratie "fficer 11, "ffice of the Cit' Ma'or, Cebu Cit', b' Ma'or

lorentino olon on ebruar' 18, 198@! /he appointment %as #escribe# as permanentQ but the Ciil

erice Commission approe# it as Qtemporar',Q sub+ect to the final action ta*en in the protest file# b' the

priate respon#ent an# another emplo'ee, an# proi#e# Qthere %as3 no pen#in( a#ministratie case

a(ainst the appointee, no pen#in( protest a(ainst the appointment nor an' #ecision b' competent

authorit' that %ill a#ersel' affect the approal of the appointment!Q & "n March 22, 198:, after protracte#

hearin(s the le(alit' of %hich #oes not hae to be #eci#e# here, the Ciil erice Commission foun# the

priate respon#ent better 0ualifie# than the petitioner for the conteste# position an#, accor#in(l', #irecte#

Qthat elicula /uoo be appointe# to the position of A#ministratie "fficer 11 in the A#ministratie Diision,

Cebu Cit', in place of elimon )ue(o %hose appointment as A#ministratie "fficer $$ is hereb'

reo*e#!Q ' /he priate respon#ent %as so appointe# on 4une 28, 198:, b' the ne% ma'or, Ma'or Ronal#

Duterte! 4 /he petitioner, ino*in( his earlier permanent appointment, is no% before us to 0uestion that

or#er an# the priate respon#ents title!

/he issue is star*l' simple5 $s the Ciil erice Commission authorie# to #isapproe a permanent

appointment on the (roun# that another person is better 0ualifie# than the appointee an#, on the

basis of this fin#in(, or#er his replacement b' the latter<

/he olicitor -eneral, rather than face the 0uestion s0uarel', sa's the petitioner coul# be ali#l'

replace# in the instant case because his appointment %as temporar' an# therefore coul# be

%ith#ra%n at %ill, %ith or %ithout cause! ain( accepte# such an appointment, it is ar(ue#, the

petitioner %aie# his securit' of tenure an# conse0uentl' ran the ris* of an abrupt separation from

his office %ithout iolation of the Constitution! (

=hile the principle is correct, an# %e hae applie# it man' times, ) it is not correctl' applie# in this

case! /he ar(ument be(s the 0uestion! /he appointment of the petitioner %as not temporar' but

permanent an# %as therefore protecte# b' Constitution! /he appointin( authorit' in#icate# that it %as

permanent, as he ha# the ri(ht to #o so, an# it %as not for the respon#ent Ciil erice Commission to

reerse him an# call it temporar'!

/he stampin( of the %or#s QAPPR"ED as /EMP"RARLQ #i# not chan(e the character of the

appointment, %hich %as clearl' #escribe# as QPermanentQ in the space proi#e# for in Ciil erice

orm No! @@, #ate# ebruar' 18, 198@! 7 =hat %as temporar' %as the approal of the appointment, not

the appointment it sell An# %hat ma#e the $pprov$l temporar' %as the fact that it %as ma#e to #epen# on

the con#ition specifie# therein an# on the erification of the 0ualifications of the appointee to the position!


27/28

/he Ciil erice Commission is not empo%ere# to #etermine the *in# or nature of the appointment

e&ten#e# b' the appointin( officer, its authorit' bein( limite# to approin( or reie%in( the

appointment in the li(ht of the re0uirements of the Ciil erice )a%! =hen the appointee is 0ualifie#

an# authoriin( the other le(al re0uirements are satisfie#, the Commission has no choice but to

attest to the appointment in accor#ance %ith the Ciil erice )a%s!

As 4ustice Ramon C! ernan#e #eclare# in an earlier case5

$t is %ell settle# that the #etermination of the *in# of appointment to be e&ten#e# lies

in the official este# b' la% %ith the appointin( po%er an# not the Ciil erice

Commission! /he Commissioner of Ciil erice is not empo%ere# to #etermine the

*in# or nature of the appointment e&ten#e# b' the appointin( officer! =hen the

appointee is 0ualifie#, as in this case, the Commissioner of Ciil erice has no

choice but to attest to the appointment! Fn#er the Ciil erice )a%, Presi#ential

Decree No! 87, the Commissioner is not authorie# to curtail the #iscretion of the

appointin( official on the nature or *in# of the appointment to be e&ten#e#! *

$n#ee#, the approal is more appropriatel' calle# an attestation, that is, of the fact that the appointee

is 0ualifie# for the position to %hich he has been name#! As %e hae repeate#l' hel#, such

attestation is re0uire# of the Commissioner of Ciil erice merel' as a chec* to assure compliance

%ith Ciil erice )a%s! 9

Appointment is an essentiall' #iscretionar' po%er an# must be performe# b' the officer in %hich it is

este# accor#in( to his best li(hts, the onl' con#ition bein( that the appointee shoul# possess the

0ualifications re0uire# b' la%! $f he #oes, then the appointment cannot be faulte# on the (roun# that

there are others better 0ualifie# %ho shoul# hae been preferre#! /his is a political 0uestion

inolin( consi#erations of %is#om %hich onl' the appointin( authorit' can #eci#e!

$t is #ifferent %here the Constitution or the la% sub+ects the appointment to the approal of another

officer or bo#', li*e the Commission on Appointments un#er 19@ Constitution! - Appointments ma#e

b' the Presi#ent of the Philippines ha# to be confirme# b' that bo#' an# coul# not be issue# or %ere

inali#ate# %ithout such confirmation! $n fact, confirmation b' the Commission on Appointments %as then

consi#ere# part of the appointin( process, %hich %as hel# complete onl' after such confirmation!

Moreoer, the Commission on Appointments coul# reie% the %is#om of the appointment an# ha#

the po%er to refuse to concur %ith it een if the Presi#ents choice possesse# all the 0ualifications

prescribe# b' la%! No similar arran(ement is proi#e# for in the Ciil erice Decree! "n the

contrar', the Ciil erice Commission is limite# onl' to the nonG#iscretionar' authorit' of

#eterminin( %hether or not the person appointe# meets all the re0uire# con#itions lai# #o%n b' the

la%!

$t is un#erstan#able if one is li*el' to be misle# b' the lan(ua(e of ection 9h3 of Article of the

Ciil erice Decree because it sa's the Commission has the po%er to QapproeQ an# Q#isapproeQ

appointments! /hus, it is proi#e# therein that the Commission sha( hae inter alia the po%er to5


28/28

9h3 Approe all appointments, )"et"er origin$l or pro(otion$l to positions in t"e ivil

servie, e&cept those presi#ential appointees, members of the Arme# orces of the

Philippines, police forces, firemen, an# +ail(uar#s, an# dis$pprove t"ose )"ere t"e

$ppointees do not possess $ppropri$te eligi'ilit% or re9uired 9u$li*i$tions. emphasis

supplie#3

o%eer, a full rea#in( of the proision, especiall' of the un#erscore# parts, %ill ma*e it clear that all

the Commission is actuall' allo%e# to #o is chec* %hether or not the appointee possesses the

appropriate ciil serice eli(ibilit' or the re0uire# 0ualifications! $f he #oes, his appointment is

approe#; if not, it is #isapproe#! No other criterion is permitte# b' la% to be emplo'e# b' the

Commission %hen it acts onGGor as the Decree sa's, QapproesQ or Q#isapproesQ an appointment

ma#e b' the proper authorities!

i(nificantl', the Commission on Ciil erice ac*no%le#(e# that both the petitioner an# the priate

respon#ent %ere 0ualifie# for the position in controers'! & /hat reco(nition alone ren#ere# it *untus

o**iio in the case an# preente# it from actin( further thereon e&cept to affirm the ali#it' of the

petitioners appointment! /o be sure, it ha# no authorit' to reo*e the sai# appointment simpl' because it

beliee# that the priate respon#ent %as better 0ualifie# for that %oul# hae constitute# an encroachment

on the #iscretion este# solel' in the cit' ma'or!

$n preferrin( the priate respon#ent to the petitioner, the Commission %as probabl' appl'in( its o%n

Rule , ection 9, of Ciil erice Rules on Personnel Actions an# Policies, %hich proi#es that

Q%heneer there are t%o or more emplo'ees %ho are ne&tGinGran*, preference shall be (ien to the

emplo'ee %ho is most competent an# 0ualifie# an# %ho has the appropriate ciil serice eli(ibilit'!Q

/his rule is inapplicable, ho%eer, because neither of the claimants is ne&t in ran*! Moreoer, the

ne&tGinGran* rule is not absolute as the Ciil erice Decree allo%s acancies to be fille# b' transfer

of present emplo'ees, reinstatement, reGemplo'ment, or appointment of outsi#ers %ho hae the

appropriate eli(ibilit'! '

/here are apparentl' no political oertones in this case, %hich loo*s to be an honest contention

bet%een t%o public functionaries %ho each sincerel' claims to be entitle# to the position in #ispute!

/his is (ratif'in( for politics shoul# neer be permitte# to interfere in the apolitical or(aniation of the

Ciil erice, %hich is suppose# to sere all the people re(ar#less of partisan consi#erations! /his

political #etachment %ill be impaire# if the securit' of tenure clause in the Constitution is

emasculate# an# appointments in the Ciil erice are reo*e# an# chan(e# at %ill to suit the

motiations an# een the fancies of %hateer part' ma' be in po%er!

=ERE"RE, the resolution of the respon#ent Commission on Ciil erice #ate# March 22, 198:,

is set asi#e, an# the petitioner is hereb' #eclare# to be entitle# to the office in #ispute b' irtue of his

permanent appointment thereto #ate# ebruar' 18, 198@! No costs!

" "RDERED!

Documents

Pubof cases