Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC G.R. No. L-19313 January 19, 1962 DOMINADOR R.

A TONA, petitioner, vs. ANDRES !. CASTILLO, ET AL., respondents. RESOL ! " O N. "ENG#ON, C.J.: #ithout pre$udice to the subse%uent pro&ul'ation of &ore e(tended opinion, the Court adopted toda), the follo*in' resolutions+ . On ,ece&ber -., /.0/, then President Carlos P. 1arcia appointed ,o&inador R. A)tona as ad interim 1overnor of the Central Ban2. On the sa&e da), the latter too2 the correspondin' oath. On ,ece&ber 34, /.0/, at noon, President5elect ,iosdado Macapa'al assu&ed office6 and on ,ece&ber 3/, /.0/, he issued Ad&inistrative Order No. - recallin', *ithdra*in', and cancellin' all ad interim appoint&ent &ade b) President 1arcia after ,ece&ber /3, /.0/, 7date *hen he, Macapa'al, had been proclai&ed elected b) the Con'ress8. On 9anuar) /, /.0-, President Macapa'al appointed Andres :. Castillo as ad interim 1overnor of the Central Ban2, and the latter %ualified i&&ediatel). On 9anuar) -, /.0-, both appointed e(ercised the po*ers of their office, althou'h Castillo infor&ed A)tona of his title thereto6 and so&e unpleasantness developed in the pre&ises of the Central Ban2. ;o*ever, the ne(t da) and thereafter, A)tona *as definitel) prevented fro& holdin' office in the Central Ban2. So, he instituted this proceedin' *hich is practicall), a quo warranto, challen'in' Castillo<s ri'ht to e(ercise the po*ers of 1overnor of the Central Ban2. A)tona clai&s he *as validl) appointed, had %ualified for the post, and therefore, the subse%uent appoint&ent and %ualification of Castillo *as void, because the position *as then occupied b) hi&. Castillo replies that the appoint&ent of A)tona had been revo2ed b) Ad&inistrative Order No. - of Macapa'al6 and so, the real issue is *hether the ne* President had po*er to issue the order of cancellation of the ad interim appoint&ents &ade b) the past President, even after the appointees had alread) %ualified. 1wph1.t !he record sho*s that President 1arcia sent to the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents = *hich *as not then in session = a co&&unication dated ,ece&ber -., /.0/, sub&ittin' >for confir&ation> ad interim appoint&ents of assistant director of lands, councilors, &a)ors, &e&bers of the provincial boards, fiscals, $ustices of the peace, officers of the ar&), etc.6 and the na&e of ,o&inador R. A)tona as 1overnor of the Central Ban2 occupies nu&ber ?@, bet*een a $ustice of the peace and a colonel of the Ar&ed Aorces. Another co&&unication of President 1arcia bearin' the sa&e date, sub&itted a list of ad interim appoint&ents of Aorei'n Affairs officers, $ud'es, fiscals, chiefs of police, $ustices of the peace, &a)ors, councilors, etc. nu&ber 03 of *hich *as that of ,o&inador R. A)tona for 1overnor of the Philippines in the Boards of "nternational Monetar) Aund, "nternational Ban2 for Reconstruction and ,evelop&ent, etc. A third co&&unication li2e*ise dated ,ece&ber -., /.0/, addressed to the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents sub&itted for confir&ation /-? na&es of persons appointed as $ud'es of first instance, &e&bers of provincial boards, and boards of 'overn&ent corporations, fiscals, $ustice of the peace, even one associate $ustice of this Court occup)in' position No. B and t*o associate $ustices of the Court of Appeals 7. and /48 bet*een an assistant of the Solicitor51eneral<s Office, and the chair&an of the board of ta( appeals of Pasa) Cit), *ho in turn are follo*ed b) $ud'es of first instance, and inserted bet*een the latter is the na&e of another associate $ustice of the Court of Appeals. !here *ere other appoint&ents thus sub&itted b) President 1arcia on that date, ,ece&ber -., /.0/. All in all, about three hundred fift) 73@48 >&idni'ht> or >last &inute> appoint&ents. "n revo2in' the appoint&ents, President Macapa'al is said to have acted for these and other reasons+ 7/8 the out'oin' President should have refrained fro& fillin' vacancies to 'ive the ne* President opportunit) to consider na&es in the li'ht of his ne* policies, *hich *ere approved b) the electorate in the last elections6 7-8 these scandalousl) hurried appoint&ents in &ass do not fall *ithin the intent and spirit of the constitutional provision authoriCin' the issuance of ad interim appoint&ents6 738 the appoint&ents *ere irre'ular, i&&oral and un$ust, because the) *ere issued onl) upon the condition that the appointee *ould i&&ediatel) %ualif) obviousl) to prevent a recall or revocation b) the inco&in' President, *ith the result that those deservin' of pro&otion or appoint&ent *ho preferred to be na&ed b) the ne* President declined and *ere b)5passed6 and 7?8 the abnor&al conditions surroundin' the appoint&ent and %ualifications evinced a desire on the part of the out'oin' President &erel) subvert the policies of the inco&in' ad&inistration. "t is ad&itted that &an) of the persons &entioned in the co&&unication to the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents dated ,ece&ber -., /.0/, did not %ualif). !here is evidence that in the ni'ht of ,ece&ber -., there *as a scra&ble in

MalacaDan of candidates for positions tr)in' to 'et their *ritten appoint&ents or havin' such appoint&ents chan'ed to &ore convenient places, after so&e last &inute bar'ainin'. !here *as unusual hurr) in the issuance of the appoint&ents = *hich *ere not coursed throu'h the ,epart&ent ;eads = and in the confusion, a *o&an appointed $ud'e *as desi'nated >Mr.> and a &an *as desi'nated >Mada&.> One appointee *ho 'ot his appoint&ent and *as re%uired to %ualif), resorted to the rush of as2in' per&ission to s*ear before a relative official, and then never %ualified. #e are infor&ed, it is MalacaDan<s practice = *hich *e find to be lo'ical = to sub&it ad interim appoint&ents onl) *hen the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents is in session. One 'ood reason for the practice is that onl) those *ho have accepted the appoint&ent and %ualified are sub&itted for confir&ation. Nevertheless, this ti&e, MalacaDan sub&itted its appoint&ents on the same day the) *ere issued6 and the Co&&ission *as not then in session6 obviousl) because it foresa* the possibilit) that the inco&in' President *ould refuse to sub&it later the appointees of his predecessor. As a result, as alread) adverted to, so&e persons *hose na&es *ere sub&itted for confir&ation had not %ualified nor accepted their appoint&ents. Because of the haste and irre'ularities, so&e $ud'es of first instance %ualified for districts *herein no vacancies e(isted, because the incu&bents had not %ualified for other districts to *hich the) had been supposedl) transferred or pro&oted. Referrin' specificall) to $ud'es *ho had not %ualified, the course of conduct adopted b) Aor&er Chief 9ustice Moran is cited. Bein' a&bassador in Spain and desirin' to return to this Court even as associate $ustice, Moran *as tendered an ad interim appoint&ent thereto b) President Euirino, after the latter had lost the election to President Ma'sa)sa), and before leavin' the Presidenc). Said A&bassador declined to %ualif) bein' of the opinion that the &atter should be left to the inco&in' ne*l)5elected President. Of course, nobod) *ill assert that President 1arcia ceased to be such earlier than at noon of ,ece&ber 34, /.0/. But it is co&&on sense to believe that after the procla&ation of the election of President Macapa'al, his *as no &ore than a >care5 ta2er> ad&inistration. ;e *as dut) bound to prepare for the orderl) transfer of authorit) the inco&in' President, and he should not do acts *hich he ou'ht to 2no*, *ould e&barrass or obstruct the policies of his successor. !he ti&e for debate had passed6 the electorate had spo2en. "t *as not for hi& to use po*ers as incu&bent President to continue the political *arfare that had ended or to avail hi&self of presidential prero'atives to serve partisan purposes. !he fillin' up vacancies in i&portant positions, if fe*, and so spaced to afford so&e assurance of deliberate action and careful consideration of the need for the appoint&ent and the appointee<s %ualifications &a) undoubtedl) be per&itted. But the issuance of 3@4 appoint&ents in one ni'ht and planned induction of al&ost all of the& a fe* hours before the inau'uration of the ne* President &a), *ith so&e reason, be re'arded b) the latter as an abuse Presidential prero'atives, the steps ta2en bein' apparentl) a &ere partisan effort to fill all vacant positions / irrespective of fitness and other conditions, and thereb) deprive the ne* ad&inistration of an opportunit) to &a2e the correspondin' appoint&ents. Nor&all), *hen the President &a2es appoint&ents the consent of the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents, he has benefit of their advice. #hen he &a2es ad interim appoint&ents, he e(ercises a special prero'ative and is bound to be prudent to insure approval of his selection either previous consultation *ith the &e&bers of the Co&&ission or b) thereafter e(plainin' to the& the reason such selection. #here, ho*ever, as in this case, the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents that *ill consider the appointees is different fro& that e(istin' at the ti&e of the appoint&ent - and *here the na&es are to be sub&itted b) successor, *ho &a) not *holl) approve of the selections, the President should be doubly careful in e(tendin' such appoint&ents. No*, it is hard to believe that in si'nin' 3@4 appoint&ents in one ni'ht, President 1arcia e(ercised such >double care> *hich *as re%uired and e(pected of hi&6 and therefore, there see&s to be force to the contention that these appoint&ents fall be)ond the intent and spirit of the constitutional provision 'rantin' to the E(ecutive authorit) to issue ad interim appoint&ents. nder the circu&stances above described, *hat *ith the separation of po*ers, this Court resolves that it &ust decline to disre'ard the Presidential Ad&inistrative Order No. -, cancellin' such >&idni'ht> or >last5&inute> appoint&ents. Of course, the Court is a*are of &an) precedents to the effect that once an appoint&ent has been issued, it cannot be reconsidered, speciall) *here the appointee has %ualified. But none of the& refer to &ass ad interim appoint&ents 7three5 hundred and fift)8, issued in the last hours of an out'oin' Chief E(ecutive, in a settin' si&ilar to that outlined herein. On the other hand, the authorities ad&it of e(ceptional circu&stances $ustif)in' revocation 3 and if an) circu&stances $ustif) revocation, those described herein should fit the e(ception. "ncidentall), it should be stated that the underl)in' reason for den)in' the po*er to revo2e after the appointee has %ualified is the latter<s e%uitable ri'hts. Fet it is doubtful if such e%uit) &i'ht be successfull) set up in the present situation, considerin' the rush conditional appoint&ents, hurried &aneuvers and other happenin's detractin' fro& that de'ree of 'ood faith, &oralit) and propriet) *hich for& the basic foundation of clai&s to e%uitable relief. !he appointees, it &i'ht be ar'ued, *ittin'l) or un*ittin'l) cooperated *ith the strata'e& to beat the deadline, *hatever the resultant conse%uences to the di'nit) and efficienc) of the public service. Needless to sa), there are instances *herein not onl) strict le'alit), but also fairness, $ustice and ri'hteousness should be ta2en into account. #;EREAORE, the Court e(ercisin' its $ud'&ent and discretion in the &atter, hereb) dis&iss the action, *ithout costs.

Labrador, Reyes, J. .L., !aredes and "e Leon, J.J., concur. S$%ara&$ O%'n'on( PADILLA, J., concurrin'+ Once &ore this Court has to pass upon and deter&ine a controvers) that calls for an interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution. !he facts that 'ave rise to the petition need not be restated as the) are set forth in opinion rendered for the Court. !he %uestion is *hether the appoint&ent of a person to a public office b) a President *hose ter& of office *as about to e(pire or cease is la*ful or does not contravene the Constitution6 or, if la*ful after the appointee has ta2en his oath, until *hen *ould such appoint&ent be valid and effective. !he constitutional point involved see&s to have been overloo2ed the fra&ers of the Constitution. "t *ould see& that the fra&ers, *ell5&eanin' persons that the) *ere, never foresa* an eventualit) such as the one confrontin' the Republic. !he fra&ers never thou'ht and anticipated that citiCen elevated b) the people to such an e(alted office the President of the Republic, *ould perfor& an act *hich thou'h not e(pressl) prohibited b) the Constitution and the la*, ou'ht not to be done, since a sense of propriet) *ould be enou'h to stop hi& fro& perfor&in' it. !he petitioner invo2es section /4, para'raph ?, article :"", of the Constitution *hich provides that = !he President shall have the po*er to &a2e appoint&ents durin' the recess of the Con'ress, but such appoint&ents shall be effective onl) until disapproval b) the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents or until the ne(t ad$ourn&ent of the Con'ress. nder these constitutional provisions there see&s to be no doubt that the President &a) &a2e the appoint&ent, and if approved b) the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents, it *ould un%uestionabl) be la*ful, valid and effective, but if disapproved or not acted upon b) the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents then the appoint&ent beco&es ineffectual and the appointee ceases and can no lon'er perfor& the duties of the office to *hich he had been appointed. "t is ur'ed that the petitioner<s appoint&ent havin' been &ade b) the President durin' the recess of the Con'ress and he havin' ta2en his oath, the appoint&ent is la*ful, valid and effective until disapproval b) the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents or until the ne(t ad$ourn&ent of the Con'ress should the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents fail to act on it. #d interim appoint&ents that the President &a) &a2e durin' the recess of the Con'ress are those &ade durin' a period of ti&e fro& the ad$ourn&ent of the Con'ress to the openin' session, re'ular or special, of the sa&e Con'ress. "n other *ords, if the President had convened in a special session the fourth Con'ress *hose ter& *as to e(pire on the 34th of ,ece&ber /.0/ and durin' such session the ad interim appoint&ents had been confir&ed b) the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents there *ould be little doubt that the appoint&ents *ould be la*ful and valid. !he 'overn&ent established b) the Constitution is one of chec2s and balances to preclude and prevent arro'ation of po*ers b) officers elected or appointed under it. nder the provisions of the Constitution >!he ter& of office of Senators shall be si( )ears and shall be'in on the thirtieth da) of ,ece&ber ne(t follo*in' their election.>/ And >!he ter& of office of the Me&bers of the ;ouse of Representatives shall be four )ears and shall be'in on the thirtieth da) of ,ece&ber ne(t follo*in' their election.> - nder section /4, para'raph ?, article :"", of the Constitution, above %uoted, the President &a) &a2e appoint&ents durin' the recess of the Con'ress, >but such appoint&ents shall be effective onl) until disapproval b) the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents or until the ne(t ad$ourn&ent of the Con'ress.> . !he ter& >recess>, in its broadest sense, &eans and refers to the intervenin' period bet*een ad$ourn&ent of a re'ular session of one hundred da)s e(clusive of Sunda)s, or of a Special session *hich cannot continue lon'er than thirt) da)s, and the convenin' thereof in re'ular session once ever) )ear on the fourth Monda) of 9anuar) or in special session to consider 'eneral le'islation or onl) such sub$ects as he 7the President8 &a) desi'nate. 3 And such intervenin' period refers to the sa&e Con'ress that had ad$ourned and *as to be convened. Such intervenin' period cannot refer to t*o different Con'resses, one that has ad$ourned and one ne*l) chosen or elected to &eet in re'ular session as provided for b) the Constitution, or in special session b) the call of the President. !he ter& of the President ... shall end at noon the thirtieth da) of ,ece&ber follo*in' the e(piration four )ears after 7his8 election and the ter& of 7his8 successor shall be'in fro& such ti&e. ? "f the ad interim appoint&ents &ade b) the President durin' the recess of the Con'ress are effective onl) until disapproval b) the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents or until the ne(t ad$ourn&ent of the Con'ress = a li&itation on the po*er of the President = there is a co'ent and stron' reason for holdin' to be the intent of the fra&ers of the Constitution that such appoint&ents &ade b) hi& ceased to be valid and effective after the ter& of the Con'ress e(istin' at the ti&e of the &a2in' of such appoint&ents had ended or e(pired. !he end or e(piration of the of the Con'ress e(istin' at the ti&e of the &a2in' of the ad interim appoint&ents b) the President is a stron'er cause or reason for the lapse or ineffectualit) of such appoint&ents than >the ne(t ad$ourn&ent of the Con'ress.> Since that Con'ress no lon'er e(ists and hence can no lon'er convene and then >ad$ourn.> !he effectivit) and validit) of the appoint&ent of the petitioner as 1overnor of the Central Ban2 ceased, lapsed and e(pired on thirtieth of ,ece&ber /.0/. ;e is no lon'er entitled hold the office to *hich he had been appointed. M) vote, therefore, is for the denial of the petition.

"i$on, J., concurs. " concur *ith the fore'oin' concurrin' opinion of 9ustice Padilla, the sa&e bein' based on an additional 'round $ustif)in' denial of the petition under consideration. "AUTISTA ANGELO, J., concurrin'+ . "n addition to the reasons stated in the resolution adopted b) this Court on 9anuar) /., /.0-, " *ish to e(press the follo*in' vie*s+ . /. !he >&idni'ht appoint&ents> &ade b) President 1arcia *ere e(tended b) hi& under Section /4, Para'raph ?, Article :"" of the Constitution *hich provides+ >!he President shall have the po*er to &a2e appoint&ents durin' the recess of the Con'ress, but such appoint&ents shall be effective onl) until disapproval b) the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents or until the ne(t ad$ourn&ent of the Con'ress.> "t is clear that these appoint&ents can onl) be &ade durin' the recess of Con'ress because the) are ad interim appoint&ents. !he ter& >recess> has a definite le'al &eanin'. "t &eans the interval bet*een a session of Con'ress that has ad$ourned and another of the sa&e Con'ress. "t does not refer to the interval bet*een the session of one Con'ress and that of another. "n that case the interval is not referred to as a >recess> but an ad$ourn&ent sine die. !hus, in the case of !ipton v. Par2er, G/ Ar2. /.?, the court said+ >!he <recess< here referred to b) 9ud'e Coole) &eans the inter&ission bet*een sittin's of the sa&e bod) at its re'ular or ad$ourned session, and not to the interval bet*een the final ad$ourn&ent of one bod) and the convenin' of another at the ne(t re'ular session. #hen applied to a le'islative bod), it &eans a te&porar) dis&issal, and not an ad$ourn&ent sine die.> Since the appoint&ents in %uestion *ere &ade after the Aourth Con'ress has ad$ourned sine die and ceased to function on ,ece&ber 34, /.0/, the) cannot parta2e of the nature of ad interim appoint&ents *ithin the &eanin' of the Constitution. -. !he Co&&ission on Appoint&ents under our constitutional set5up is not continuin' bod) but one that co5e(ists *ith the Con'ress that has created it. !his is so because said Co&&ission is a creation of the Senate and of the ;ouse of Representatives. #hile the Senate is a continuin' bod), the ;ouse ceases at the end of its fourth )ear. "t cannot therefore be continuin' it bein' a creation of a bod) half of *hich is alive and the other half has ceased to e(ist. !his theor) can also be 'leaned fro& the proceedin's of the constitutional convention. !hus, the preli&inar) draft of the Philippine Constitution provides for a per&anent Co&&ission and for the holdin' of sessions of the Co&&ission even durin' the recess of Con'ress. After &ature deliberation the proposal *as defeated and a substitute *as adopted *hich is no* e&bodied in Article :", Section /-, of our Constitution. As a &atter of fact, as finall) adopted, the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents has to be or'aniCed upon the convenin' of a ne* Con'ress after the election of the Spea2er of the ;ouse of Representatives or of the President of the Senate, as the case &a) be, as provided for in Section /3, Article :" of the Constitution 7Article :"", Preli&inar) ,raft of the Constitution, :ol. -, Arue'o+ !he Ara&in' of the Constitution, pp. .B-, .BG8. An ad interim appoint&ent, to be co&plete, needs to be sub&itted to the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents one the sa&e is constituted. !his is reflected in the Constitution *hen it provides that >such appoint&ents shall be effective onl) until disapproval b) the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents or until the ne(t ad$ourn&ent of the Con'ress> 7Section /4, Para'raph ?, Article :""8. !his &ean that it &ust be sub&itted to the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents of the Con'ress that has created it. "t cannot be sub&itted to the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents of a different Con'ress. Since the appoint&ents in %uestion *ere sub&itted to the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents *hich ceased to function on ,ece&ber 34, /.0/, the) lapsed upon the cessation of said Co&&ission. Conse%uentl), the) can be recalled b) the ne* Chief E(ecutive. 3. An ad interim appoint&ent is not co&plete until the appointee ta2es the oath of office and actuall) ta2es possession of the position or enters upon the dischar'e of its duties. !he &ere ta2in' of the oath of office *ithout actual assu&ption of office is not sufficient to constitute the appointee the actual occupant thereof *ho &a) not be re&oved therefro& e(cept for cause 7McChesne) v. Sa&pson, -3 S.#. -d. @B?8. !he case of %ummers &. '$aeta, B/ Phil., G@?, cannot be cited as a precedent as to *hen an ad interim appoint&ent beco&es per&anent and bindin'. !hat case involves a cadastral $ud'e *ho *as 'iven an ad interim appoint&ent as $ud'e at lar'e. After assu&in' the office and dischar'in' his duties, his appoint&ent *as not confir&ed. ;e clai&ed that he could still revert to his for&er position as cadastral $ud'e. !rue, this Court &ade a state&ent therein that an ad interim appoint&ent beco&es per&anent after ta2in' the oath of office, but such state&ent is &erel) an obiter dictum because the case could have been decided on the doctrine that, havin' accepted an inco&patible office, petitioner *as dee&ed to have abandoned the position of cadastral $ud'e. "n rel)in' on certain cases for the proposition that once an appointee has ta2en the oath of office his appoint&ent beco&es irrevocable petitioner fails to consider that in said cases there had either been an actual dischar'e of dut) and actual ph)sical possession or assu&ption of office follo*in' the oath5ta2in' as to constitute the appointee the occupant of the position fro& *hich he cannot be re&oved *ithout cause. Even the case of (arbury &. (adison, / Cranch, .S. /3G, - L. Ed., 0/, 0., cannot be invo2ed as a precedent, for there the appointees *ere &erel) no&inated and their no&inations confir&ed b) the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents even if the) have later ta2en their oath of office. Certainl), the) can no

lon'er be deprived of their appoint&ents for then the e(ecutive *ould be actin' in disre'ard of the confir&in' bod) *hich is a coordinate and independent bod) not sub$ect to his control. Since the appoint&ents in %uestion *ere &ade not in the li'ht of the vie*s herein e(pressed, " a& of the opinion that the) did not ripen into valid and per&anent appoint&ents and as such *ere properl) recalled b) the ne* Chief E(ecutive. CONCEPCION, J., concurrin' in part and dissentin' in part+ . "t is *ell settled that the 'rantin' of *rits of prohibition and mandamus is ordinaril) *ithin the sound discretion of the courts, to be e(ercised on e%uitable principles, and that said *rits should be issued *hen the ri'ht to the relief is clear 7@@ C.9.S. -@, -., G3 C.9.S. /B8. "nsofar as the &a$orit) resolution relied upon discretion and the e%uities of the case in den)in' said *rits, " concur, therefore, in the afore&entioned resolution. ;o*ever, " cannot see &) *a) clear to subscribin' the observations therein &ade representin' the &otives alle'edl) underl)in' petitioner<s appoint&ent and that of &an) others *ho are not parties in this case, and $ustif)in' the revocation of such appoint&ents. M) reasons, a&on' others, are+ . /. Save *here the incu&bent has a te&porar) appoint&ent or is re&ovable at the *ill of the appointin' po*er, an appoint&ent once co&plete, b) the perfor&ance of all acts re%uired b) la* of the appointin' po*er, is irrevocable. An appoint&ent to office &a) be revo2ed at an) ti&e before the appoint&ent beco&es final and co&plete, but thereafter unless the appointee is re&ovable at the *ill of appointin' po*er. Aor the purpose of this rule, an appoint&ent to office is co&plete *hen the last act re%uired of the person or bod) vested *ith the appointin' po*er has been perfor&ed. #here b) constitutional, statutor), or other le'al provision it is re%uired that certain steps be ta2en to &a2e effective appoint&ent, it has been held that the appoint&ent beco&es co&plete be)ond the possibilit) of recall *hen the last of the prescribed steps is ta2en, and that, *here no &ethod of appoint&ent is provided, an appoint&ent does not beco&e effective and be)ond recall until the appointin' officer b) so&e act or *ord evinces a final intent to vest the appointee *ith title to the office.> 70G C.9.S., pp. /0/5/0-8 . After the act of appoint&ent is co&plete, the appointin' authorit) &a) not revo2e its for&er appoint&ent and &a2e another. And appoint&ent to office is co&plete *hen the last act re%uired of the person or bod) vested *ith the appointin' po*er has been perfor&ed. 7@0 C., p. .@?8 . "n all $urisdictions *here appoint&ent to office is re'arded as an e(ecutive function, as here, an appoint&ent to office once &ade is incapable of revocation or cancellation b) the appointin' e(ecutive in the absence of a statutor) or constitutional po*er of re&oval. Barrett v. ,uff //?, Han. --46 -/G P. ./B6 People v. MiCner, G Cal. @/., State v. #illia&s, --- Mo. -0B, /-/ S.#. 0?, /G Ann. Cas. /4406 ,raper v. State, /G@ Ala. @?G, @G So. GG-, Ann. Cas. /./?,, pa'e 34@, Annotation.> 7McChesne) v. Sa&pson, -3 S.#. -d., @B?8 . Ma) an appoint&ent be revo2ed b) reason of error or fraudI !his %uestion *as ta2en up in E( rel )oo*an &s. arbour 7-A 0B08 and E( rel %cofield &s. %tarr 703 A @/-8. !he first involved a Cit) Charter providin' that its co&&on council shall, in $oint convention, appoint a prosecutin' attorne). "n such convention, Coo'an obtained a &a$orit) of the votes cast and of the convention. pon announce&ent of this result, a &e&ber of the convention offered a resolution declarin' Coo'an elected, but the resolution *as defeated. !hen, t*o resolutions *ere offered and approved+ one declarin' that the ballots ta2en *ere null and of no effect b) reason of errors in the sa&e and another declarin' Barbour elected prosecutin' attorne). !he issue *as *ho had been appointed thereto. !he court held that it *as Coo'an, he havin' obtained a clear &a$orit) and there havin' been no error or fraud in the votin', althou'h it did not den) the po*er of the convention to correct errors and to nullif) the effects of fraud in the votin' b) invalidatin' the sa&e and callin' another election, had the proceedin's been tainted *ith such error or fraud. !he second case referred to a si&ilar provision in a cit) charter, to the effect that appoint&ents b) the co&&on council shall be b) ballot and that the person receivin' a pluralit) of ballots shall be elected. !he first ballotin' ta2en for the election of the cit) surve)or of Bri'eport resulted in -@ ballots bein' cast. "t *as announced that there *as one ballot &ore than &e&bers votin', and that there *ere /3 ballots for Scofield, // for Starr and one blan2 ballot. Scofield &aintained that this result a&ounted to his appoint&ent precludin' the council fro& ta2in' a ne* ballot but such pretense *as re$ected. "nas&uch as the nu&ber of ballots cast e(ceeded the nu&ber of persons votin', the council *as $ustified in believin' that the proceedin' *as not free fro& suspicion of fraud or &ista2e in the votin' and, accordin'l) in ta2in' another vote. "n both cases, the fraud or &ista2e alluded to referred to the &anner of votin' or of countin' the ballots cast, not to the intent of the voters in choosin' a particular appointee. -. An ad interim appoint&ent, &ade durin' a recess of Con'ress, is co&plete and irrevocable upon the perfor&ance of the last act re%uired b) la* fro& the appointin' po*er, even *ithout previous notice to the appointee, or acceptance b) hi&, or *ithout subse%uent action of the le'islative or'an that &a) ter&inate its effectivit). "n the case of appoint&ent &ade b) a sin'le e(ecutive such as a 'overnor, &a)or, etc., it is undisputed that the appoint&ent once &ade is irrevocable. ((( ((( (((

#here an appoint&ent sub$ect to confir&ation b) the senate is &ade b) a 'overnor durin' a recess of the senate, ... the %uestion arises as to *hether such an appoint&ent &a) be reconsidered and *ithdra*n b) the 'overnor before it is acted upon b) the Senate. ((( ((( ((( "n arrett &. "uff 7/.-38 //? Han. --4, -/G Pac. ./B, *here appoint&ents &ade b) the 'overnor durin' a recess of the le'islature, *hich appoint&ents could not be confir&ed b) the senate as re%uired b) la* until the ne(t session of that bod), *ere revo2ed b) the 'overnor<s successor, and other persons *ere appointed to the offices, such action b) hi& bein' ta2en after the senate had convened and had ta2en under advise&ent the confir&ation of the persons first appointed to the offices, but before the senate had ta2en an) definite action *ith re'ard to such confir&ation, and the senate, confir&ed the first appointee, but, despite this act of the senate, co&&issions *ere issued b) the 'overnor to the second appointee, it *as held, in reliance upon the ter&s of the statutes *hich provided that the 'overnor should <appoint< persons to such offices *ith the advice and consent of the senate, as distin'uished fro& the provision of the Constitution of the nited States 'overnin' appoint&ents b) the President, *hich provides that the President shall <no&inate< and, b) and *ith the advice and consent of the senate, shall <appoint< persons to office, that the act of the 'overnor in &a2in' the first appoint&ents *as final and e+hausted the po*er of the 'overnor<s office in that re'ard unless and until the appointments were re,ected by the senate, and that, therefore, the persons appointed by the first *o&ernor *ere entitled to the office. "n the *ords of the court, <!he po*er of the 'overnor havin' been e(ercised, he had no further po*er of the 'overnor havin' been e(ercised, he had no further control over the respective offices unless and until the appointees had been re$ected b) the senate.< "n reachin' this result, the court e&phasiCed the difference bet*een a no&ination and an appoint&ent, holdin' that, *here the statute relatin' to appoint&ents b) the 'overnor *ith the consent of the senate provides that the 'overnor shall appoint persons to the office *ith the consent of the senate, rather than &erel) no&inate persons for consideration b) the senate, the appointment is final and conclusi&e without confirmation. ... . Li2e*ise in (c)hesney &. %ampson 7/.348 -3- H) 3.@, -3 S.#. 7-d.8 @B?, the act of 'overnor in &a2in' a recess appoint&ent *as held to be not merely a nomination sub$ect to revocation b) the 'overnor at an) ti&e prior to action thereon b) the senate, but a final and irre&ocable appoint&ent sub,ect only to re,ection by the senate. "n support of this result, it *as said+ <"t is ur'ed that appoint&ent to the office consists of t*o separate acts, one b) the 'overnor and one b) the senate, and until both have acted there is no appoint&ent such as to brin' the incu&bent *ithin the protection of the la*. Even so, the t*o po*ers do not act concurrentl), but consecutivel), and action once ta2en and co&pleted b) the e(ecutive is not sub$ect to reconsideration or recall. ... !he fact that the title to the office, and the tenure of the officer, are sub$ect to the action of the senate, does not render inco&plete the act of the chief e(ecutive in &a2in' the appoint&ent. -he appointment alone confers upon the appointee for the time bein* the ri*ht to ta.e and hold the office, and constitutes the last act respectin* the matter to be performed by the e+ecuti&e power./ . ((( ((( ((( "n People e( rel. yder &. (i$ner 7/B@G8 G Cal. @/., in holdin' that an appoint&ent &ade b) a 'overnor to fill an office *hich had e(pired durin' a recess of the le'islature *as not &erel) an appoint&ent to fill a vacanc) *hich *ould e(pire at the end of the ne(t session of the le'islature, but *as an appointment for a full term, and that the act of the 'overnor durin' a subse%uent session of the le'islature, in appointin' another to the office and as2in' his confir&ation b) the le'islature, was unauthori$ed and &oid, it *as said that, the power of the e+ecuti&e ha&in* been once e+ercised, he had no further control o&er the office until the appointee has been re,ected by the senate. > 7B. ALR, pp. /3B, /3., /?4.8 . 3. !he irrevocabilit) of the ad interim appoint&ent adverted to above beco&es &ore apparent *hen *e consider that the ;ouse, Co&&ission on Appoint&ents or other a'enc) of Con'ress char'ed *ith the function of ter&inatin' the effectivit) of such appoint&ent, &a) act thereon, b) approvin' or disapprovin' the sa&e, even thou'h the E(ecutive had not sub&itted or for*arded it to said ;ouse, Co&&ission or a'enc) of Con'ress, and even thou'h either the out'oin' or the inco&in' E(ecutive shall have sub&itted for confir&ation the na&e of a subse%uent appointee in lieu of the first one.. !his *as the situation &et in People e( rel, 0merson &s. %haw&er 734 #)o 300, --- Pac. //8. !he facts therein *ere+ On 9ul) /, /./., 1overnor Care) of #)o&in' appointed E&erson as state en'ineer, to fill the vacanc) caused b) the resi'nation of its incu&bent. pon the e(piration of the latter<s ter&, 1overnor Care) reappointed E&erson for a full ter& of si( 708 )ears, fro& and after April /, /.-/. !his last appoint&ent *as confir&ed b) the state le'islature at its ne(t session in /.-3. !rior thereto, ho*ever, 1overnor Care)<s ter& had e(pired and his successor had appointed Sha*ver as state en'ineer. !hereupon Sha*ver ousted E&erson fro& such office. "t *as held that E&erson had a better ri'ht thereto6 that his appoint&ent in /.-/ *as a co&pleted appoint&ent, requirin* no action by the %enate to entitle hi& to hold said office6 that a recess appoint&ent once &ade b) >the e(ecutive is not sub$ect to reconsideration or recall, >even thou'h not as )et confir&ed b) the Senate, inas&uch as,> the appoint&ent alone confers upon the appointee for the ti&e bein' the ri'ht to ta2e and hold the office, and constitutes the last act respectin' the &atter to be perfor&ed b) the e(ecutive po*er>6 and that, althou'h the ter& of 1overnor Care) had e(pired and neither he nor his successor had for*arded

E&erson<s appoint&ent to the Senate for confir&ation or re%uested the Senate to act upon said appoint&ent, the sa&e had been validl) confir&ed b) said bod), for . !he provision as to the office here in %uestion found in the Constitution does not sa) that the appoint&ent &ade b) the 1overnor shall be confir&ed b) the Senate *hen re%uested b) the for&er, or upon a co&&unication b) hi& sub&ittin' the &atter to the Senate. And *e perceive no substantial reason for addin' b) construction an) such restriction upon the Senate<s ri'ht to act. 7People v. Sha*ver, --- P. //6 see, also, Co&&on*ealth v. #aller, /?@ Pa. -3@, -3 Atl. 3B-6 State v. #illia&s, -4 S.C. /36 Richardson v. ;enderson, ? #)o. @3@, 3@ Pac. @/G, and other cases cited in the Sha*ver case.8 . ?. !he fore'oin' 'oes to sho*, also, that the %uestion *hether the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents is or is not a continuin' bod) can not affect the deter&ination of the case. Besides, the constitutional provision &a2in' an ad interim appoint&ent, if not disapproved b) the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents, effective onl) until the ne(t ad$ourn&ent of Con'ress, clearl) indicates that such )ommission must ha&e an opportunity to appro&e or disappro&e the appointment and that its inaction, despite such opportunit), at the session of Con'ress ne(t follo*in' the &a2in' of the appoint&ent = durin' *hich it could have &et, and, probabl), did &eet = &ust be understood as an e(pression of un*illin'ness to sta&p its approval upon the act of the e(ecutive. No such opportunit) e(ists *hen the out'oin' Con'ress has not held an) session, re'ular or special after the &a2in' of the appoint&ent and before the e(piration of the ter& of said Con'ress, and the ne* Con'ress has not, as )et, or'aniCed itself or even &et. @. !he A&erican rule concernin' irrevocabilit) of appoint&ents is bolstered up in the Philippines b) Section ? of Article J"" of the Constitution, *hich provides that = >no officer of e&plo)ee in the Civil Service shall be re&oved e(cept for cause as provided b) la*.> 7Article :"", Section ?.8 . "n fact, in his concurrin' opinion in 0raa &s. 1er*el de "ios 7B@ Phil., /G8, our distin'uished Chief 9ustice pointed out that the revocation of an appoint&ent, if feasible, >should be co&&unicated to the appointee before the &o&ent he %ualified,> and that >any re&ocation thereafter, is tantamount to remo&al and &ust be $ud'ed accordin' to the rules applicable to the re&oval> 7e&phasis ours8. "n the present case, the revocation of petitioner<s appoint&ent *as not co&&unicated to hi& before he %ualified b) ta2in' his oath of office. "t is not even clai&ed that an) of the statutor) causes for re&oval of petitioner herein e(ists, or that the procedure prescribed for such re&oval has been co&plied *ith. 0. Once an appointee has %ualified, he ac%uires a le'al, not &erel) e%uitable ri'ht, *hich is protected not onl) b) statute, but, also b) the Constitution, for it cannot be ta2en a*a) fro& hi&, either b) revocation of the appoint&ent or b) re&oval, e(cept for cause, and *ith previous notice and hearin', consistentl) *ith said Section ? of Article J"" of our funda&ental la*, and *ith the constitutional re%uire&ent of due process 7Se'ovia vs. Noel, ?G Phil., @?G6 Sec. 0G C.9.S. //G, ?- A&. 9ur. BBG8. 7See also, People e( rel R)an v. 1reen, @B N. v. -.@6 People vs. 1ardner, @. Barb /.B6 "" Le*is Sutherland Statutor) Construction, pp. //0/ and //0-6 Meche& on Public Officers, Sec. 3B.6 -- R. C. L. 3GG5 3GB6 -@ A&. ,ec. 0.450./, G438. G. !he case of -ipton &s. !ar.er 7G? S. #., -.B8 has been cited in support of the theor) that Con'ress of the Philippines *as not in >recess> on ,ece&ber -., /.0/, and that, accordin'l), ad interim appoint&ents could not validl) be &ade in such date. !he %uestion involved in said case *as *hether a committee of the Senate of Ar2ansas could be authoriCed b) the sa&e to function after the ad$ourn&ent sine die of the re'ular session of the state 1eneral Asse&bl). !he State Supre&e Court considered as decisive authorit) the vie* e(pressed b) 9ud'e Coole), to the effect that a le'islative co&&ittee >has no authorit) to sit durin' a recess of a ;ouse *hich appointed hi&, *ithout its per&ission to that effect>. !he issue thus hin'ed on the &eanin' of the ter& >recess> as used by Jud*e )ooley. Resolvin' this %uestion, said court held that the recess referred to b) Jud*e )ooley *as >onl) the inter&ission bet*een the sittin's of the sa&e bod) at its re'ular or ad$ourned session and not to the interval bet*een the final ad$ourn&ent of one bod) and the convenin' of another at the ne(t re'ular session>.. "n this connection, it should be noted that, as an a'enc) of the Senate, the co&&ittee involved in said case could not operate for its principal be)ond the latter<s ter&. Moreover, under the Constitution of Ar2ansas, the re'ular biennial session of the 1eneral Asse&bl) could not e(ceed 04 da)s, unless b) a vote of -K3 of the &e&bers of each of the two ;ouses of the le'islature. "nas&uch as the Senate could not, *ithout the concurrence of the ;ouse, directl) e(tend the period of its re'ular session, neither could it, *ithout such concurrence, indirectl) e(tend said period, b) 'rantin' its afore&entioned co&&ittee the authorit) to function be)ond said period. As stated b) the Court >the co&&ittee, bein' the &ere a'enc) of the bod) *hich appointed it, dies *hen the bod) itself dies, unless it is continued b) la*>, *hich the Senate &a) not enact, *ithout the concurrence of the ;ouse.. !he decision in said case did not see2 to define the &eanin' of the ter& >recess> as used in an) constitution or statute. "t did not even refer to the authorit) to &a2e appoint&ents durin' >recess>. "t has absolutel) no bearin', therefore, on the issue before us. pon the other hand, ,r. 9ose M. Arue'o, a pro&inent &e&ber of the constitutional convention, sa)s, in his *or2 on >!he Ara&in' of the Philippine Constitution> 7:ol ", pp. ?3?5?3@8, that the draft of the provision on ad interim appoint&ents b) the President, as sub&itted b) the correspondin' co&&ittee, followed the principles of the Jones Law and that the

reco&&endation of the co&&ittee *as readil) approved on the floor of the convention, althou'h the co&&ittee on st)le 'ave said provision its present phraseolo'). Pursuant to the 9ones La*, >appoint&ents &ade *hile the Senate is not in session shall be effective either until disapproval or until the ne(t ad$ourn&ent of the Senate>. ;ence, the ter& >recess> appearin' in Section /47?8 of Article :"" of our Constitution should be construed to &ean >*hile Con'ress is not in session> and this is confir&ed b) the practice consistentl) observed in the Philippines for ti&e i&&e&orial, as *ell as the ad interim appoint&ent e(tended b) President Macapa'al to respondent Castillo. B. !he case of (c)hesney &s. %ampson 7-3 S. #. -d. @B?8 has, also, been invo2ed in support of the proposition that >an ad interim appoint&ent is not co&plete until the appointee ta2es the oath of office and actually ta.es possession of the position or enters upon the dischar'e of its duties> and that, before such actual ta2in' of possession, thou'h after the oath ta2in', the appointee &a) be re&oved *ithout cause. #e have not found in said case an)thin' $ustif)in' such clai&. !he issue in said case *as *hether a state 'overnor could recall an unconfir&ed appoint&ent of McChesne) to the state te(tboo2 co&&ission *hen there had been no session of the Senate subse%uent to the appoint&ent, and such issue *as decided in the ne*ati&e. Althou'h, in addition to acceptin' the appoint&ent, McChesne) had %ualified and e(ercised the function of the office, the decision of the Court clearl) indicates that it *as not necessar) for hi& either to dischar'e the duties of the office or even to ta2e the oath of office, in order to render his appoint&ent irrevocable. !he Court e(plicitl) declared that the appoint&ent, once >co&pleted by the e+ecuti&e is not sub$ect to reconsideration or recall6> that the appoint&ent >is co&plete *hen the appointin* authority has perfor&ed the acts incu&bent upon hi& to acco&plish the purpose6> and that in the case of recess appoint&ents, li2e that of McChesne),> the appointment alone confers upon the appointee for the ti&e bein' the ri'ht to ta2e and hold the office and constitutes the last act respectin' the &atter to be perfor&ed by the e+ecuti&e po*er> co&pletin' the appoint&ent and renderin' the sa&e irrevocable. "n short, the McChesne) case is authorit) for the petitioner herein. .. Most, if not all appoint&ents &ade b) the President have t*o 7-8 aspects, na&el), the le'al and the political. !he first refers to his authorit) to &a2e the appoint&ent. !he second deals *ith the *isdo& in the e(ercise of such authorit), as *ell as *ith its propriet). #hether 'iven vacanc) or nu&ber of vacancies should be filled, or *ho a&on' several %ualified persons shall be chosen, or *hether a 'iven appoint&ent or nu&ber of appoint&ent *ill favor the political part) to *ho& the po*er of appoint&ent belon's and *ill in$ure the interest of a rival political part) and to *hat e(tent, are, to &) &ind, essentiall) and t)picall) political &atters. ;ence, " believe that the %uestion *hether certain appoint&ents should be sanctioned or turned do*n b) reason of the i&proper, i&&oral or &alevolent &otives *ith *hich said &atters *ere alle'edl) handled is, li2e*ise, clearl) political, and as such, its deter&ination belon's, not to the courts of $ustice 7:era vs. Avelino, GG Phil., /.-, -4@6 /0 C.9.S 0B.50.46 #illou'hb) on the Constitution, :ol. """ /3-05/3-G8, but to the political or'an established precisel) to chec2 possible abuses in the e(ercise of the appointin' po*er = the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents. "ndeed, " can hardl) conceive of an) %uestion &ore patentl) and characteristicall) political than this one, or &ore appropriate for deter&ination of said bod). Neither the possible or probable control thereof b) &e&bers of the Nacionalista Part) nor the nu&ber of offices or appoint&ents involved can affect the nature of the issue. Surel), its political character is the sa&e *hichever political part) &a) have the lar'est nu&ber of votes in the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents. !he bi' nu&ber of said appoint&ents &erel) tend to &a2e &ore &anifest the political co&ple(ion thereof and its non5$ustifiable nature. /4. "n 'smea &s. !endatum 7L5/G/??, October -B, /.048, *e refused to disturb the action of the ;ouse of Representatives in suspendin' a &e&ber thereof = *ho had &ade dero'ator) i&putations a'ainst the President of the Philippines = upon the 'round that such i&putations constituted a breach of the courtes) due to a coordinate branch of the 1overn&ent. Fet, in the present case, i&putations si&ilarl) dero'ator) to the sa&e branch of the 1overn&ent are, in effect, &ade in the &a$orit) resolution. " cannot see ho* such i&putations can be reconciled *ith the position ta2en b) this Court in the 'smea case and in other cases 7Barcelona vs. Ba2er, @ Phil., BG6 Severino vs. 1overnor51eneral, /0 Phil., 3006 Abueva vs. #ood, ?@ Phil., 0/-6 Ale$andrino vs. EueCon, ?0 Phil., B@6 Mabana' vs. LopeC :ito, GB Phil., /6 Cabili vs. Arancisco, L5?03B, Ma) B, /.@/8 in *hich it >fastidiousl) observed> the theor) of separation of po*ers 7Os&eDa vs. Pendatu&, supra8. !hus, in %antos &s. 2atco 7@@ Off. 1aC. B0?/8, in *hich a depart&ent head *as sou'ht to be en$oined fro& electioneerin', in vie* of the e(plicit provision of the Civil Service Act of /.@. 7Republic Act No. --04, section -.8, prohibitin' all officers and e&plo)ees in the civil service, >*hether in the co&petitive or classified, or non5co&petitive or unclassified service,> fro& en'a'in' directl) or indirectl) in partisan political activities or ta2in' part in an) election e(cept to vote, *e held that the issue therein raised *as one of >i&propriet) as distin'uished fro& ille'alit),> and that, as such, it >is not $usticiable b) this Court.> "n (abana* &s. Lope$ 1ito 7GB Phil., /8, *e refused to decide, upon the sa&e 'round, *hether specified nu&bers of votes constituted three5fourths of all &e&bers of each ;ouse of Con'ress. "n 1era &s. #&elino 7GG Phil., /.-8, *e not onl) declared that >the $udiciar) is not the repositor) of re&edies for all political or social evils,> but, also, %uoted *ith

approval the state&ent, &ade in #le,andrino &s. 3ue$on 7?0 Phil., B/8, to the effect that >the $udicial depart&ent has no po*er to revise even the &ost arbitrar) and unfair action of the le'islative depart&ent, or of either ;ouse thereof, ta2en in pursuance of the po*er co&&itted e(clusivel) to that depart&ent b) the Constitution.> 7E&phasis ours.8 . //. "n the present case, *e have co&pletel) reversed our stand on the principle of separation of po*ers. #e have in%uired into the &otives of the E(ecutive depart&ent in &a2in' the appoint&ents in %uestion, althou'h it is *ell settled, under the afore&entioned principle, that+ . 1enerall) courts cannot in%uire into the &otive, polic), *isdo&, or e(pedienc) of le'islation. !he $ustice, *isdo&, polic), necessit), or e(pedienc), of a la* *hich is *ithin its po*ers are for the le'islature, and are not open to in%uir) b) the courts, e(cept as an aid to proper interpretation.> 7/0 C.9.S. ?G/5?GB8 . "f this is true as re'ards the le'islative branch of the 'overn&ent, " can see no valid reason, and none has been pointed out, *h) the sa&e nor& should not 'overn our relations, *ith the e(ecutive depart&ent. ;o*ever, *e have not &erel) disre'arded such nor&. #e are, also, in effect, restrainin' the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents = an or'an of a coordinate, co5e%ual branch of the 1overn&ent = fro& actin' on the %uestioned appoint&ents. #hat is &ore, *e are virtuall) assu&in' in advance that said bod) = *hich has not been or'aniCed as )et and *hose &e&bership is still undeter&ined = *ill not act in har&on) *ith the spirit of our Constitution. /-. "t is trite to sa) that certain &oral and political aspects of the issue before us cannot but produce a stron' aversion to*ards the case of petitioner herein and the hundreds of others appointed under the sa&e conditions as he *as. Althou'h &e&bers of the bench &ust al*a)s endeavor to &ini&iCe the influence of e&otional factors tendin' to affect the ob$ectivit) essential to a fair and i&partial appraisal of the issues sub&itted for their deter&ination, it is onl) natural = and, " venture to add, fortunate 7for, other*ise, ho* could the) hope to do $ustice to their fello*&enI8 = that the) should basicall) react as other &e&bers of the hu&an fa&il). !his is probabl) the reason *h) 9ustice ,ou'las of the Aederal Supre&e Court of the .S., said, in #bel &. 4.%. 7? La*)ers Edition, -d, 00B, 0BB8 + >Cases of notorious cri&inals = li2e cases of s&all, &iserable ones = are apt to &a2e bad la*. #hen 'uilt per&eates a record, even $ud'es so&eti&es rela( and let the police ta2e shortcuts not sanctioned b) constitutional procedures. .... !he har& in the 'iven case &a) see& e(cusable. But the practices 'enerated b) the precedent have far5reachin' conse%uences that are har&ful and in$urious be)ond &easure&ent.>. Let us hope that no such conse%uences *ill flo* fro& the precedent established in this case. "ARRERA, J., dissentin'+ !he instant case started *ith a si&ple petition for prohibition and &anda&us *ith preli&inar) in$unction instituted b) petitioner A)tona *ho clai&s to have been dul) appointed ad interim 1overnor of the Central Ban2, a'ainst respondent Castillo *ho, alle'edl) acco&panied b) his correspondent Colonel 1utierreC and a host of heavil) ar&ed Philippine Constabular) Ran'ers, interfered *ith and prevented the petitioner in the dischar'e of his duties and prero'atives as such 1overnor of the Central Ban2. ,urin' the hearin', ho*ever, and i&&ediatel) thereafter, a 'reat a&ount of e(traneous &atter affectin' persons not parties to the proceedin's has been introduced into the case and a veritable avalanche of &e&oranda after &e&oranda and &anifestations after &anifestations s*elled the records and helped involve the issues. One a&on' the doCens *ho as2ed to be ad&itted as amici curiae, even presented an ans*er in behalf of the people to support the side of the respondents. nfortunatel), in the confusion, the case of the i&&ediate parties beca&e obscured b) considerations of circu&stances and &atters for and *ith *hich petitioner and respondents are not directl) connected.. "n &) opinion, the funda&ental %uestions *hich this Court is called upon to resolve in the present case a specificall)+ . 7/8 "s the ad interim, appoint&ent of petitioner A)tona valid *hen e(tendedI . 7-8 "f so, did it auto&aticall) lapse *ith the endin' the ter& of office of the t*elve Con'ress&en co&posin' one5half of the &e&bership of the Co&&ission Appoint&entsI . 738 Ma) this appoint&ent be le'all) recalled or *ithdra*al after A)tona has %ualifiedI . Before enterin' into the discussion of the >propriet), &oralit) and *isdo&> of the appoint&ent, it is necessar), " believe, that the fore'oin' le'al propositions &ust first be cleared out. ". !he :alidit) of A)tona<s Appoint&ent+ . A)tona<s ad interim appoint&ent is assailed on the theor) that it *as not &ade durin' a >recess> of Con'ress as provided in para'raph ?, section /4 of Article :"" of the Constitution. "t is clai&ed for the respondents dents that the *ord >recess> &eans >the inter&ission bet*een sittin's of the sa&e bod) at its re'ular or ad$ourned session, and not to the interval bet*een the final ad$ourn&ent of one bod) and the convenin' of another at the ne(t re'ular session. #hen applied to a le'islative bod), it &eans a te&porar) dis&issal, and not ad$ourn&ent sine die.> "n support of this vie*, counsel cites the case of -ipton &. !ar.er, G/ Ar2. /.3, fro& *hich the fore'oin' %uotation *as ta2en. An e(a&ination of this case, ho*ever, discloses that it did not refer to the po*er of the President to &a2e ad interim appoint&ents. !he pronounce&ent *as &ade in connection *ith the interpretation of Section /G, Article @ of the Constitution of the State of Ar2ansas. !he case involved the validit) of the certificate of the auditor *ith reference to the le'alit) of the e(penses of a co&&ittee of the State Senate authoriCed b) the latter to &a2e certain investi'ations be)ond

the duration of the session of the 1eneral Asse&bl). !he court, in declarin' the certificate *ithout sanction of la*, stated+ . >!he Senate has no po*er b) resolution of its o*n to e(tend its session, and neither did it have po*er to such separate resolution to continue its co&&ittee, a &ere a'enc) of the bod), be)ond the ter& of the bod) itself *hich created it.> . in vie* of the provisions of the afore&entioned Section /G, Article @ of the state Constitution prescribin' >that the re'ular biennial session of the Le'islature shall not e(ceed 04 da)s, unless b) -K3 vote of the &e&bers elected to each house, and section -3 re%uirin' a vote of the &a$orit) of each house to enact a la* or pass a resolution havin' the force and effect of a la*>. Apparentl) an opinion of 9ud'e Coole) see&in'l) to the contrar) *as cited to refute this vie* of the court, and so the decision *ent on to sa)+ Each house, sa)s 9ud'e Coole), &ust also be allo*ed to proceed in its o*n *a) in the collection of such infor&ation &a) see& i&portant to a proper dischar'e of its functions6 and *henever it is dee&ed desirable that *itnesses should be e(a&ined, the po*er and the authorit) to do so is ver) properl) referred to a co&&ittee, *ith an) such po*ers short of final le'islative or $udicial action as &a) see& necessar) or e(pedient in the particular case. Such a co&&ittee has no authorit) to sit durin* a recess of the house *hich has appointed it, *ithout its per&ission to that effect. ut the house is at liberty to confer such authority if it sees fit. "t is in this connection and evidentl) in a desire to e(plain the opinion of 9ud'e Coole) that the court &ade the pronounce&ent relied upon b) respondents, thus+ . .... !he recess here referred to b) 9ud'e Coole) *e thin2 should be construed to &ean onl) the inter&ission bet*een sittin's of the sa&e bod) at its re'ular or ad$ourned session, and not to the interval bet*een the final ad$ourn&ent of one bod) and the convenin' of another at the ne(t re'ular session. #hen applied to a le'islative bod), it &eans a te&porar) dis&issal and not an ad$ourn&ent sine die. !he conclusion reached b) the court can not be other*ise. !he case refers to the po*ers of one house of the state Le'islature, *ith the concurrence of the other, to confer authorit) upon its o*n co&&ittee to act be)ond the duration of the session of the 1eneral Asse&bl). Certainl), 9ud'e Coole)<s vie* that each house has po*er to confer authorit) to its co&&ittee to act durin' a recess &ust be understood to e(ist onl) durin' the life of the house creatin' the co&&ittee. "t can not 'o be)ond its o*n e(istence, that is, be)ond its ad$ourn&ent sine die. But this rulin' is no ar'u&ent that the E(ecutive<s po*er to &a2e appoint&ents durin' such ad$ourn&ent sine die does not e(ist $ust because a house of the le'islature lac2s po*er to authoriCe its co&&ittee to act durin' the sa&e ad$ourn&ent. One refers to the po*er of a defunct bod) to act be)ond its life6 the other refers to the po*er of another authorit), the e(ecutive, to perfor& its functions after the e(piration of that other bod). Non5e(istence of the first does not &ean non5 e(istence of the other. "t is to be noted that the different counsel advocatin' the cause of the respondents are not even a'reed in the application of their interpretation of the *ord >recess>. So&e of the& ar'ue that the interre'nu& *hich the) contend is not recess, co&pro&ises the entire period bet*een the ad$ourn&ent of the ?th Con'ress in Ma), /.0/ and the openin' of the /st session of the first session of the @th Con'ress on 9anuar) --, /.0-, so that all ad interim appoint&ents e(tended durin' this period are null and void. Others clai& that such interre'nu& is that period bet*een ,ece&ber /3, /.0/, date of ad$ourn&ent of the last session of the ?th Con'ress, and 9anuar) --, /.0-. "t see&s that President Macapa'al is of this sa&e vie* because his ad&inistrative Order No. - specificall) refers to all appoint&ents &ade after ,ece&ber /3, /.0/. Still others, at least one, advanced the theor) durin' the oral ar'u&ent that the banned period is that bet*een the ad$ourn&ent of the ?th Con'ress in Ma), and ,ece&ber 34, /.0/, e(cludin' therefro& the period bet*een this last date and 9anuar) --, /.0-. Obviousl), this theor) *as advanced in an effort to lend validit) to the appoint&ents recentl) &ade b) President Macapa'al, for if the entire period bet*een Ma) or ,ece&ber, /.0/ to 9anuar) --, /.0- is held not a recess, but an ad$ourn&ent sine die, then all appoint&ents heretofore &ade b) the present Chief E(ecutive *ould suffer the sa&e defect as those e(tended b) for&er President 1arcia. !his last ar'u&ent is unavailin' because it, li2e*ise, is untenable, tested upon the sa&e authorit) cited b) counsel, i.e., that the ter& >recess> &eans >the inter&ission between sittin's of the same body.> Since the @th Con'ress has not as )et even convened, the period bet*een ,ece&ber 34 and 9anuar) -- can not be a recess of the @th Con'ress because it, definitel), is not an inter&ission bet*een sittin*s of the sa&e bod). "n the circu&stances, it see&s it is an over5state&ent to sa) that the ter& >recess has a definite le'al &eanin' in the sense attributed to it in the -ipton &s. !ar.er case. !he confusion in the &inds of the several counsels for the respondents as to the application of the alle'ed &eanin' of the ter&, indicates a belabored effort on their part to i&pute a &eanin' to satisf) their case. pon the other hand, *e find in >;inds Precedents of the ;ouse of Representatives> 7:ol. @, pp. B@-5B@38, a le'islative interpretation b) the nited States Senate &ade durin' the discussion of the ter& >recess of the Senate> in connection *ith the President<s/ po*er to &a2e appoint&ents, as follo*s+ . !he *ord <recess< is one of ordinar), not technical, si'nification, and it is evidentl) used in the constitutional provision in its co&&on and popular sense. "t &eans in Article "", above referred to, precisel) *hat it &eans in Article """, in *hich it is a'ain used. Conferrin' po*er upon the e(ecutive of a State to &a2e te&porar) appoint&ent of a Senator, it sa)s+ .

And if vacancies happen, b) resi'nation or other*ise, durin' the recess of the le'islature of an) State, the e(ecutive thereof &a) &a2e te&porar) appoint&ents until the ne(t &eetin' of the le'islature, *hich shall then fill such vacancies.< . "t &eans $ust *hat *as &eant b) it in the Article of Confederation, in *hich it is found in the follo*in' provision>+ . !he nited States in Con'ress asse&bled shall have authorit) to appoint a co&&ittee to sit in the recess of Con'ress, it be deno&inated a co&&ittee of the States, and to consist of one dele'ate fro& each State.< . "t *as evidentl) intended b) the fra&ers of the Constitution that it should &ean so&ethin' real, not so&ethin' i&a'inar)6 so&ethin' actual, not so&ethin' fictitious. !he) used the *ord as the &ass of &an2ind then understood it and no* understand it. "t &eans, in our $ud'&ent, in this connection the period of ti&e *hen the Senate is not sittin' in re'ular or e(traordinar) session as a branch of the Con'ress, or in e(traordinar) session for the dischar'e of e(ecutive functions6 *hen its &e&bers o*e no dut) of attendance6 *hen its Cha&ber is e&pt)6 *hen, because of its absence, it cannot receive co&&unications fro& the President or participate as bod) in &a2in' appoint&ents.> . !he Attorne) 1eneral of the nited States *as also of this vie* *hen he stated+ . !he recess of the Senate durin' *hich the President shall have po*er to fill a vacanc) that &a) happen, &eans the period after the final ad$ourn&ent of Con'ress for the session and before the ne(t session be'ins6 *hile an ad$ourn&ent durin' a session of Con'ress &eans a &erel) te&porar) suspension of business fro& da) to da), or for such brief periods of ti&e as are a'reed upon b) the $oint action of the t*o houses. !he President is not authoriCed to appoint an officer durin' the current holida) ad$ourn&ent of the Senate, *hich *ill have the effect of an appoint&ent &ade in the recess occurrin' bet*een t*o sessions of the Senate.> 7President 5 Appoint&ent Officers 5 ;olida) Recess, /.4/, -3 Op. Att). 1en. @.., 7 .S.C.A. Const. Art. -, Sec. -L-M.. "t is *orth*hile to note that our Constitution in para'raph ?, Section /4 of Article :"" spea2s of >recess> *ithout &a2in' an) distribution bet*een the sessions one con'ress and the sessions of another. And it is trite to sa) that *hen the la* &a2es no distinction, no distinction should be &ade, especiall) if to do so *ould result in a strained interpretation thereof and defeat the evident purpose of the fra&ers of the Constitution 5 in this instance, to render it certain that at ti&es there should be, *hether the Con'ress is in session or not, an officer for ever) office, entitled to dischar'e the duties thereof. 7@ ;inds, op. cit., p. B@3.8 . "". Lapsin* of #ytona/s #ppointment5 . "t is contended for the respondents that since /- &e&bers of the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents ceased to be such upon the e(piration of their ter& of office at &idni'ht of ,ece&ber -., /.0/, the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents li2e*ise ceased to e(ist on the theor) that creation can not e(ist be)ond the life of its creator at least *ith respect to one5half of its &e&bers. !his see&s to ste& fro& the *ron' notion that the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents is a creature of the Con'ress. !his confuses the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents as a constitutional bod) *ith its &e&bers. !he bod) continued to e(ist, but onl) its &e&bership chan'es periodicall). #hen the Constitution provides in Section /3 of Article 0 thereof that >the Electoral !ribunals and the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents shall be constituted *ithin 34 da)s after the Senate and the ;ouse of Representatives shall have been or'aniCed *ith the election of their President and Spea2er, respectivel)>, it did not &ean that the Senate and the ;ouse of Representatives thereb) create said bodies, no &ore than the President can be said to create the Supre&e Court b) appointin' the 9ustices therein. "t si&pl) ordained that the Co&&ission be constituted or or'aniCed b) electin' the &e&bers thereof, *hose positions have alread) been created in virtue of Section /- of the sa&e Constitution. !o hold the Electoral !ribunals and the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents are non5e(istin' durin' the period fro& ,ece&ber 34, /.0/ to 9anuar) --, /.0- 7and durin' the correspondin' period ever) four )ears thereafter8 *ill result in an absurdit) and a situation destructive of the nor&al processes provided in the Constitution. One of such absurd results *ould be that no electoral protest a'ainst an) elected and proclai&ed con'ress&an or senator can be le'all) filed *ith the Electoral !ribunals *ithin the period prescribe b) their rules, that is, *ithin fifteen da)s follo*in' the procla&ation of the results of the election, *hich period falls *ithin the ti&e *hen the Electoral !ribunals 7as is the case of Co&&ission on Appoint&ents8 are alle'edl) non5e(istent. !he proceedin's in the Constitutional Convention are cited to support the theor) that the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents is not a per&anent co&&ission. A revie* of the records, ho*ever, of that convention reveals that *hat *as intended in the proposed draft *as to authoriCe the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents to hold sessions even *hen the Con'ress is not in session. !he &ere fact that such a proposal *as defeated and, conse%uentl), the *ord >per&anent> *as not adopted in the final te(t, does not i&port that the Constitution &eant to 'ive an off and on e(istence to the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents lapsin' ever) four )ears *hen the t*elve of its &e&bers cease to be such. On the contrar), it see&s &ore lo'ical to hold that the le'al e(istence of the Co&&ission as *ell as the Electoral !ribunals continue irrespective of the vacancies that &a) e(ist in the &e&bership thereof. "t is for this reason that the personnel of these bodies do not cease periodicall), but continue to perfor& their duties in their respective offices for *hich the) are le'all) paid their salaries b) the 'overn&ent. "t see&s clear, therefore, that the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents did not lapse on ,ece&ber -., /.0/. Neither did the appoint&ent of A)tona lapse on that date because the sa&e could not be acted upon b) the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents durin' the recess of the Con'ress.

""". (ay the appointment of #ytona be le*ally recalled or withdrawn after he has qualified for the position to which he was appointed6 . Precedents are to the effect that *hen once an appoint&ent has been e(tended b) the Chief E(ecutive *ho, as is provided in our Constitution, has the sole po*er of appoint&ent sub$ect onl) to the consent of the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents, and the appointee has accepted the appoint&ent, the sa&e beco&es co&plete and the appointin' po*er can not *ithdra* it e(cept in cases *here the tenure of the appointee is at the Chief E(ecutive<s pleasure or upon 'rounds $ustif)in' re&oval and after due process. !his is not because the appoint&ent constitutes a contract 7for trul) a public office can not be sub$ect of an) contract8, but because of the provisions of the Constitution itself to the effect that >no officer or e&plo)ee in the Civil Service shall be re&oved or suspended e(cept for cause as provided b) la*.> "f, therefore, the recall or the *ithdra*al of the appoint&ent of A)tona *as not authoriCed b) la*, then his assu&ption of the functions of his office on 9anuar) -, /.0- *as clearl) *ithin his le'al ri'ht and the interference of Castillo, a''ravated b) the assistance or at least the presence of &e&bers of the Ar&ed Aorces, *as clearl) unla*ful. !he fore'oin' disposes, in &) opinion, the le'al issue and the ri'hts of the parties in the present case. But a'ainst these, to &e, clear &andates of the Constitution and the le'al and $udicial precedents, respondents have appealed to this Court for it to e(ercise >$udicial states&anship> invo2in' the spirit of the Constitution. "t is clai&ed that there *as a &anifest abuse of po*er b) the out'oin' President in e(tendin', on the eve of the e(piration of his ter&, so&e three hundred and fift) ad interim appoint&ents to fill an e%ual nu&ber of vacancies in the different branches of the 'overn&ent6 that no proper consideration *as 'iven of the &erits of the appointees, it appearin' that in the case of at least so&e of the appointees to the $udiciar), their assurance of an i&&ediate assu&ption of office or the ta2in' of oath *as &ade a condition precedent to the appoint&ents, and that there *as a *ild scra&ble in MalacaDan a&on' the appointees on the ni'ht of ,ece&ber -.. #e are scandaliCed b) this and e(pect the Court to appl) the re&ed). #hat of the proceedin's in Con'ress durin' the last da) of session *hen bills after bills are passed in a &anner not too dissi&ilar to the described scene in MalacaDanI Can the Supre&e Court be e(pected to correct this too b) declarin' all such la*s as invalid $ust as *e are as2ed to invalidate these appoint&entsI . Be this as it &a), *hatever &a) be our personal vie*s on this &atter, " a'ree *ith Mr. 9ustice Concepcion that not all *ron's or even abuse of po*er can be corrected b) the e(ercise of the hi'h prero'atives of the Supre&e Court vested in it b) the Constitution. As " ta2e it, the hi'her and &ore delicate is the prero'ative, the 'reater should be the de'ree of self5 restraint in the e(ercise thereof, lest the fine and tested scale of chec2s and balances set up b) the Constitution be $arred. "n the sa&e &anner that *e e(pect circu&spection and care, even double care, on the part of the other t*o co5e%ual coordinate depart&ents of the 'overn&ent, so &ust *e be &ost cautious and slo* in $ud'in' the &oralit), propriet) and 'ood faith involved in the actuations of the other depart&ents in &atters co&in' *ithin their co&petence. !he re&ed), " believe, under the circu&stances is *ith the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents to *hich the appoint&ents have been sub&itted. !he &ore fact that it is e(pected that the Co&&ission on Appoint&ents *ould be controlled b) the part) of the out'oin' President is i&&aterial, because le'al processes can not be &ade to depend upon the fortunes of political parties, for there is still the ulti&ate re&ed) b) the people in all authorit). At an) rate, as has alread) been aptl) said+ the $udiciar) is not the repositor) of re&edies for all political or social evils, and that the $udicial depart&ent has no po*er to revise even arbitrar) or unfair action of the other depart&ents ta2en in pursuance of the po*er co&&itted e(clusivel) to those depart&ents b) the Constitution.. Ma) " add+ all the scandalous circu&stances brou'ht to the attention of this Court did not lin2 the petitioner herein, save for the fact that this appoint&ent *as e(tended on the sa&e da) as those issued under the unusual and irre'ular circu&stances attendin' the other appoint&ents. "f at all, there is evidence in favor of A)tona to the effect that insofar as he is concerned, his appoint&ent to the position of 1overnor of the Central Ban2 has been under consideration for a lon' ti&e and that he is %ualified for the position. "t can not, therefore be said that *ith respect to hi& there *as no &ature deliberation and due consideration of his %ualifications and of the need of the service. he char'e *as &ade that the position of 1overnor of the Central Ban2 has been vacant for several &onths and that the President should have filled it earlier. Fet, *hen the President actuall) filled it as he did, he is criticiCed clai&in' that there *as no i&&ediate need for such action in vie* of the fact that there *as an Actin' 1overnor. !hat it *as reall) necessar) to fill the position is evidenced b) the act of President Macapa'al hi&self in &a2in' his o*n appoint&ent hardl) t*ent)5four hours after he recalled the appoint&ent of A)tona. Su&&ariCin', " *ould sa) that all the circu&stances cited b) the respondents that have surrounded the issuance of the appoint&ents in %uestion, have to do *ith the &ode or &anner of the e(ercise of the authorit) to &a2e the appoint&ent, %uite apart fro& the e(istence of the authorit) itself. !he observance of 'ood faith, &oralit) and propriet) b) the other t*o co5e%ual coordinate depart&ents in the perfor&ance of their functions &ust be secured b) their sense of dut) and official oath hand not b) an) supervisor) po*er of the courts.. !he role of courts in our sche&e of 'overn&ent is to interpret the la* and render $ustice under it. !his si&pl) &eans that *hatever &a) be our o*n personal feelin's as to the propriet), &oralit), or *isdo& of an) official act or actuation of a

public officer or an) a'enc) of the 'overn&ent *ithin their respective co&petence brou'ht to the attention of the Court for ad$udication, the) should not be per&itted to prevail over clear le'al considerations, for ours is a re'i&e under the Rule of La*.. "n vie* of the fore'oin', " a& constrained to re'ister &) dissent. )oo&no&$( "ENG#ON, C.9.+ / !hese positions had been vacant for &onths. !he ?th Con'ress e(pired at &idni'ht ,ece&ber -., /.0/.. 3 B. A.L.R., /3@ Anno. PADILLA, 9., concurrin'+ / Section 3, Article :". Section 0, Article :". 3 Section ., Article :". ? Section ?, Article :"". "ARRERA, 9., dissentin'+ / !he po*er of the .S. President to &a2e appoint&ents is b) and *ith the advice and consent of the Senate.. !he La*phil Pro$ect 5 Arellano La* Aoundation