ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
branch of modern law under which the executive department of the government, acting in a quasi-
legislative or quasi-judicial capacity, interferes with the conduct of the individual for the purpose of
promoting the well-being of the community, as under laws regulating public interest, professions, trades
and callings, rates and prices, laws for protection of public health and safety, and the motion of public
convenience.
A consequence of the ever-increasing complexities of society and the proliferation of problems
of government that cannot readily or effectively be addressed by the traditional public agencies
or solved by the other disciplines of public law.
Under this doctrine, all rules of conduct are supposed to be laid down directly by the legislature,
subject to the direct enforcement of the executive department, and the application or
interpretation, also directly by the judiciary.
Object and Scope: regulation of private right for public welfare.
By reason of expediency, delegation of powers is made. Through which, the legislature is able
to relieve itself from the responsibility to legislate directly on relatively minor matters and of
attending as well to the adjudication of essentially factual questions that more properly pertain
to the executive authorities. In this matter, the legislature can concentrate on matters of national
or greater significance.
Sources of administrative law:
1. Constitutional or statutory enactments creating administrative bodies
2. Decisions of courts interpreting the charters of administrative bodies and defining their powers,
rights, inhibitions, among others, and the effects of their determinations and regulations.
3. Rules and regulations issued by the administrative bodies in pursuance of the purpose for which
they were created.
4. Determinations and orders of the administrative bodies in the settlement of controversies arising
in their respective fields.
Administration (1) as to institution; (2) as a function.
As to institution aggregate of individuals in whose hands the reins of government are for the
time being. Persons who actually run the government.
As a function actual running of the government by the executive authorities through the
enforcement of laws and the implementation of policies.
Government instrumentality through which the will of the State is formulated, expressed and
realized.
Administration as an activity (1) internal; (2) external
Internal administration covers those rules defining the relations of public functionaries inter se
and embraces the whole range of the law of public officers. It consists of rules laid down in a
particular agency or office, like those prescribing work assignments or job descriptions, uniforms,
procedures for the submission of reports, and the like, all of which are imposed by the superior
in said office upon his subordinates.
External administration defines the relations of the public office with public in general. The
rules prescribed thereunder do not necessarily affect the personnel of the office but are
promulgated for observance by those who have dealings or transactions with said office.
Administrative agency a body endowed with quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial powers for the purpose
of enabling it to carry out laws entrusted to it for enforcement or execution.
Agency any department, bureau, office, commission, authority or office, commissioner or of the National
Government authorized by the law or executive order to make rules, issue licenses, grant rights or
privileges and adjudicate cases; research institutions with respect to licensing functions; government
corporations with respect to functions regulating private right, privilege, occupation or business; and
officials in the exercise of disciplinary power.
Government instrumentality any agency of the National Government not integrated within the
department framework, vested with special functions.
GOCCs any agency organized as a stock or non-stock corporation, vested with functions relating to
public needs whether governmental or proprietary in nature, and owned by the Government of the
Republic of the Philippines directly or through its instrumentalities either wholly, or where applicable as in
the case of stock corporations, to the extent of at least a majority of the outstanding capital stock.
Nature of Administrative Agencies executive in nature but endowed with quasi-legislative and quasi-
judicial powers.
Creation: (1) Constitution; (2) statutes.
Abolishment: (1) if made by the constitution, may be abolished only by election of the Constitutional
Amendment; (2) If made through statute, may be abolished through said laws.
The types of administrative bodies have been generally classified as:
(1) Those set up to offer some gratuity, grant or special privileges;
(2) To carry on certain the actual business of the government;
(3) To perform some business service for the public;
(4) To regulate business affected with public interest;
(5) To regulate private business and individuals under the police power;
(6) To adjust individual controversies because of some strong social policy involved; and,
(7) To make government a private party.
Advantages of administrative bodies:
- Expertise derived from specialized training and experience.
- Adaptability to change and ease in reacting to new even emergency situations.
In relation to Regular Departments
LEGISLATIVE
- Bound to obey and implement the legislative will
- Its office, incidents, emoluments or appropriations may be abolished by Congress
- Legislature exert a great deal of influence upon the administrative body that can impair its
independence.
EXECUTIVE
- It is under the constitutional control of the President, which generally cannot be withdrawn or
limited by Congress.
JUDICIARY
- They cannot be deprived of their inherent power to decide all questions of law, particularly if they
have been initially resolved by administrative bodies only.
 - May review the fact-findings of administrative bodies, if done arbitrarily.
- Courts, as a matter of policy, only as a last resort and, usually, only when questions of law are
involved.
Powers of administrative agencies:
1. Quasi-legislative (aka power of subordinate legislation) permits the body to promulgate rules intended
to carry out the provisions of particular laws.
Prescribes the rule of future
It is public in nature.
Any administrative regulations and policies have the force and effect of a statute.
Rulemaking power an agency process for the formulation, amendment or repeal of a rule.
Administrative regulations are intended only to implement the law and to carry out the legislative
policy.
Primarily, the distinction between legislation and administration is discretion. In the first, the
discretion as what the law is, the second, the discretion under and in pursuance of the law.
Source of quasi-legislative powers:
The power to promulgate aalldministrative regulations is derived from the legislature, by valid delegation.
To be valid, the delegation must not create a roving commission but should be not canalized within the
banks that keep it from overflowing.
There must not be a total abdication of legislative power to delegate. The legislature is not required to
provide such a standard as confers the least amount of discretion in detailed standards in precise and
unvarying form that would be wholly unrealistic and more arbitrary that a general indefinite one.
Tests of Delegation:
a. Sufficient standard test it fixes a standard the limits of which are sufficiently determinate or
determinable to which the delegate must conform in the performance of his functions.
b. Completeness test it must be complete in itself, setting forth therein a policy to be executed, carried
out or implemented by the delegate.
2. Quasi-judicial (aka power of adjudication) enables the body to resolve, in a manner essentially
judicial, factual and sometimes even legal questions incidental to its primary power of enforcement of the
law.
An application of the rule of past
It is private in nature.
Source of quasi-judicial powers:
It is incidental to the power of regulation vested in the administrative body but is often expressly conferred
by the legislature though specific provisions in the charter of the agency.
This power is needed to enable the administrative officers to perform their executive duties.
*Both powers are necessarily implied in the exercise of its express powers.
Determinative powers:
a) Enabling powers those that permit the doing of an act which the law undertakes to regulate and which
be unlawful without the government approval (e.g. licenses).
b) Directing powers order the doing or performing of particular acts to ensure compliance with the law
and are often exercised for corrective purposes (e.g. issuance of DENR of directives on account of
environmental measures).
b.1) dispensing powers allows the administrative officers to relax the general operation
of a law or exempt from the performance of a general duty.
b.2) examining powers enables the administrative bodies to inspect the records and
premises, and investigate the activities, of persons or entities coming under its jurisdiction (e.g.
issuance of subpoenas, swearing in witnesses). This power allows the administrative agency
to actually conduct hearings, issue writs of preliminary injunction and even punish contempt.
b.3) summary powers those involving the use by administrative authorities of force
upon persons or things without the necessity of previous judicial warrant.
Exercise of powers:
- Generally considered discretionary. It involves the interpretation or construction and
enforcement of the law and the appreciation of factual questions that may be submitted to it for
resolution.
- Some are ministerial, i.e., duty of the Registry of Deeds to annotate a lien on a Torrens
Certificate.
- At any event, the jurisdiction of the administrative agencies are limited as expressly granted by
the law creating such bodies.
Kinds of Administrative Regulations:
1. Interpretative designed to provide guidelines to the law which the administrative agency is in charge
of enforcing.
Constitute the administrators construction of a statute.
Issued as an incident of its power to enforce the law and intended merely to clarify its provisions.
2. Legislative designed to implement a primary legislation by providing the details thereof.
It is in the nature of subordinate legislation.
Intended to have the binding force and effect of a law enacted by the Legislature itself.
a) Supplementary intended to fill in the details of the law and to make explicit what is only
general. It is to enlarge upon a statue, subject only to the standards fixed therein, to ensure its
effective enforcement in accordance with legislative will.
b) Contingent it is issued upon the happening of a certain contingency which the administrative
body is given discretion to determine or ascertain some circumstances on which the law makes
its own action depend, or to find the facts or conditions properly prescribed under which a law
as passed will or will note operate, that is, for putting in effect, applying or suspending a law.
Chapter 5 THE QUASI-JUDICIAL POWER
A.Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction- is the competence of an office or body to act on a given matter or decide a certain question.
Without jurisdiction, the determinations made by the administrative bodies are absolutely null and
without any legal effect.
Where jurisdiction is conferred upon:
1. Jurisdiction can be conferred upon the administrative agency by the Constitution.
 Civil Service Commission (CSC) - possess authority over all employees of all branches, subdivisions,
instrumentalities, and agencies of the Government including GOCCs with original charters.
Commission on Elections (COMELEC)- possess
a. exclusive original jurisdiction over:
all contests relating to elections, returns, and qualifications of all elective regional, provincial and
city officials
b. appellate jurisdiction over:
all contests involving elective barangay officials decided by trial courts of limited jurisdiction
Commission on Audit (COA)- shall have the power, authority, and duty to examine, audit and settle
all accounts pertaining to the revenue and receipts of, and expenditures or uses of funds and property
owned or held in trust by, or pertaining to, the Government, or any of its subdivisions, agencies, or
instrumentalities, including GOCCs with original charters, and on a post-audit basis:
a. constitutional bodies, commissions and offices that have been granted fiscal autonomy under this
Constitution
b. autonomous state colleges and universities
c. other GOCCs and their subsidiaries; and
d. such non-governmental entities receiving subsidy or equity, directly or indirectly, from or through
the Government, which are required by law or the granting institution to submit such audit as a
condition of subsidy or equity
2. Legislature also has the power or confer jurisdiction upon the administrative body and so limit
or expand its authority.
3. Each administrative body has its own peculiar jurisdiction as conferred upon it by the specific
provision of its charter.
- There are some administrative bodies, over which regular courts of justice have no jurisdiction with
respect to certain matters, as provided in said administrative bodies enabling statutes.
Example: PCGG vs Pea- RTC have no jurisdiction over the PCGG I the exercise of its power and
therefore may not interfere with ad restrain or set aside orders and actions of the Commission. In the
exercise of its quasi-judicial functions, the Commission is a co-equal body with the RTCs and co-equal
bodies have no power to control the other.
Sabio v Gordon: The SC rejected the claim of the petitioners that they were exempted from appearing
before a legislative inquiry. Nowhere in the Constitution is any provision granting such exemption. The
Congress power of inquiry, being broad, encompasses everything that concerns the administration of
existing laws as well as proposed or possibly needed statutes. It even extends to government agencies
created by Congress and officers whose positions are within the power of Congress to regulate
or even abolish. PCGG belongs to this class.
Cario vs CHR: The Court declares the CHR to have no such power; and that it was not meant by the
fundamental law to be another court or quasi-judicial agency in this country, or duplicate much less take
over the functions of the latter.
The most that may be conceded to the Commission in the way of adjudicative power is that it
may investigate. But fact finding is not adjudication, and cannot be likened to the judicial function of a
court of justice, or even a quasi-judicial agency or official. The function of receiving evidence and
ascertaining therefrom the facts of a controversy is not a judicial function, properly speaking. To be
considered such, the faculty of receiving evidence and making factual conclusions in a controversy must
be accompanied by the authority of applying the law to those factual conclusions to the end that the
controversy may be decided or determined authoritatively, finally and definitively, subject to such appeals
or modes of review as may be provided by law. This function, to repeat, the Commission does not have.
Lastimosa vs Vasquez: The Ombudsmans power to investigate and prosecute includes the investigation
and prosecution of any crime committed by a public official regardless of whether the acts or omissions
complained of are related to, or connected with, or arise from, the performance of his official duty.
It should be noted though that when the Ombudsman conducts a preliminary investigation, he exercises
not quasi-judicial but administrative power. He exercises quasi-judicial power though when he addresses
disciplinary complaints against public officers.
Settled is the rule that a tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial functions acts without jurisdiction if
no authority has been conferred by law to hear and decide the case.
Interntl Broadcasting Corp vs Jalandoon: considering that the Sandiganbayan had already transferred
the sequestered shares of stock in favour of the Republic of the Philippines, any intra-corporate
controversy which may have arisen from said ownership would have to be taken up before the SEC which
then had jurisdiction over the same, or which had authority to take cognizance of said controversy at the
time the case was initiated.
Boiser vs CA: regular courts and not the NTC has the jurisdiction over an alleged breach of contract
between two telephone companies and the resultant claim for damages. The SC holds that there was
nothing in the Commissions (NTC) power which authorizes it to adjudicate breach of contract cases,
much less award moral and exemplary damages.
Republic vs Marcopper Mining Corp: While the mines regional director has express administrative and
regulatory powers over mining operations and installations, he has no adjudicative powers over
complaints for violation of pollution control statutes and regulations.
Davao New Town Development Corp vs Commission on the Settlement of Land Problems (COSLAP):
Administrative agencies, like the COSLAP, are tribunals of limited jurisdiction and, as such, could wield
only such as are specifically granted to then by the enabling statutes. The Court stressed that the law
does not vest jurisdiction on the COSLAP over any land dispute or problem and that its jurisdiction is
confined only to disputes over lands in which the government has proprietary or regulatory interest.
Rules of Procedure
Where an administrative body is expressly granted the power of adjudication, it is deemed also vested
with the implied power to prescribe the rules to be observed in the conduct of its proceedings.
The 1987 Constitution provides that each of the Constitutional Commissions en banc may promulgate
its own rules concerning pleadings and practice before it or before any of its offices. Such rules,
however, shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. It further provides that the rules of
procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the
SC.
But to be valid, the rules must not violate fundamental rights or encroach upon constitutional
prerogatives, like the rule-making power of the SC.
Example: Philippine Lawyers Association vs. Agrava: The SC has the exclusive and constitutional
power with respect to admission to the practice of law in the Philippines1 and to any member of the
 Philippine Bar in good standing may practice law anywhere and before any entity, whether judicial or
quasi-judicial or administrative, in the Philippines.
xxx
Although the transaction of business in the Patent Office involves the use and application of technical
and scientific knowledge and training, still, all such business has to be rendered in accordance with the
Patent Law, as well as other laws, including the Rules and Regulations promulgated by the Patent
Office in accordance with law. Not only this, but practice before the Patent Office involves the
interpretation and application of other laws and legal principles, as well as the existence of facts to be
established in accordance with the law of evidence and procedure.
Administrative rules of procedure should be construed liberally in order to promote their object
and to assist the parties in obtaining a just, speedy and inexpensive determination of their respective
claims and defences. There is no denial of due process if the decision was rendered on the evidence
presented at the hearing or at least contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected.
Courts may not in the guise of interpretation, enlarge the scope of a statute and include therein situation
not provided for or intended by the law-makers.
DARAB vs Lubrica: the power of administrative agencies to promulgate rules of procedure does not or
cannot be construed as allowing it to grant itself jurisdiction ordinarily conferred only by the Constitution
or by the law. Procedure, as distinguished from jurisdiction, is the means by which the power or authority
of a court to hear and decide a class of cases are put into action. Rules of procedure are remedial in
nature and not substantive. They cover only rules on pleading and practice.
The Subpoena Power
The power to issue subpoena and subpoena duces tecum is not inherent in administrative bodies.
It is settled that these bodies may summon witnesses and require the production of evidence only when
duly allowed by law, and always only in connection with the matter they are authorized to investigate.
This power may be expressly granted in the charter of the administrative body. However, the fact that
an administrative body has been authorized to conduct an investigation does not necessarily mean it
can also summon witnesses and take testimony in the absence of a clear grant of this power from the
legislature
Power to investigate vs Power to adjudicate
Cario vs CHR: The legal meaning of "investigate" is essentially the same: "(t)o follow up step by step by
patient inquiry or observation. To trace or track; to search into; to examine and inquire into with care and
accuracy; to find out by careful inquisition; examination; the taking of evidence; a legal inquiry;" "to inquire;
to make an investigation," "investigation" being in turn describe as "(a)n administrative function, the
exercise of which ordinarily does not require a hearing.. . . an inquiry, judicial or otherwise, for the
discovery and collection of facts concerning a certain matter or matters."
In the legal sense, "adjudicate" means: "To settle in the exercise of judicial authority. To determine finally.
Synonymous with adjudge in its strictest sense;" and "adjudge" means: "To pass on judicially, to decide,
settle or decree, or to sentence or condemn. . . . Implies a judicial determination of a fact, and the entry
of a judgment."
Pascual vs Board of Medical Examiners: a respondent in an administrative case may invoke his
constitutional right against self-incrimination. At stake in this case was the partys privilege to continue
practicing medicine. The proceedings partook of the nature of a criminal suit. Hence, the availability of
the right against self-incrimination. However, the administrative determination of facts and the consequent
position of suspension/revocation of Authority/License does not make the proceedings criminal
The Contempt Power
the power to punish for contempt is essentially judicial and cannot be claimed as an inherent right by
the administrative body
To be validly exercised, it must be expressly conferred upon the body and, additionally, must be
used only in connection with its quasi-judicial as distinguished from its purely administrative or
routinary functions.
Pursuant to Section 12 of Rule 71 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, quasi-judicial agencies that
have the power to cite persons for indirect contempt can only do so by initiating them in the proper
RTC. It is not within their jurisdiction and competence to decide the indirect contempt cases.
Chapter 6
Methods of Review
Methods of judicial review are prescribed by the:
1. Constitution;
2. Statutes; or
3. Rules of Court
These methods may be:
a. specific; or
b. general
The petition for review shall be perfected within 15 days from receipt of the final administrative decision.
One motion for reconsideration may be allowed.
a. If the motion is denied- the movant shall perfect his appeal during the remaining period for appeal
reckoned from receipt of the resolution of denial.
b. If the decision is reversed- the appellant shall have 15 days from receipt of the resolution to perfect
his appeal.
**The review proceeding shall be filed in the court specified by statute or, in the absence thereof, in any
court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with the provisions on venue of the Rules of Court.
Review shall be made on the basis of the record taken as a whole. The findings of fact of the agency
when supported by substantial evidence shall be final except when specifically provided otherwise by
law.
In the absence of specific rules governing appeals from administrative decisions, the special civil
actions and other remedies provided for in the Rules of Court may be availed in the proper cases by
an aggrieved party.
The SC may review the decisions of the Office of the President on questions of law and jurisdiction
when properly raised. This does not mean judicial supremacy over the Office of the Pres. by the
performance by the SC of a duty specifically enjoined upon by it the Constitution, as part of a system
of checks and balances.
Primary Jurisdiction or Prior Resort
2 doctrines that must be considered in connection with the judicial review of administrative decisions:
1. doctrine of primary jurisdiction
2. doctrine of exhaustion administrative remedies
The doctrine of primary jurisdiction does not warrant a court to arrogate unto itself authority to resolve
a controversy the jurisdiction over which is initially lodged with an administrative body of special
competence.
Well-entrenched is the rule that courts will not interfere in matters which are addressed to the sound
discretion of the government agency entrusted with the regulation of activities coming under the
special and technical training and knowledge of such agency. Administrative agencies are given a
wide latitude in the evaluation of evidence and in the exercise of their adjudicative functions, latitude
which includes the authority to take judicial notice of facts within their special competence.
The doctrine of primary jurisdiction simply calls for the determination of administrative questions which
are ordinarily questions of fact, by administrative agencies rather than courts of justice.
When an administrative agency is conferred quasi-judicial functions, all controversies relating to the
subject matter pertaining to its specialization are deemed to be included within its jurisdiction. Split
jurisdiction is not favoured.
Observance of this doctrine is required to ensure consistency in administrative findings and also
because of the conceded expertise of the administrative body, as compared to the judicial tribunal in
resolving the administrative questions in general.
The SC has emphasized that the doctrine of primary jurisdiction applies only to the exercise by an
administrative agency of its quasi-judicial function.
The SC clarified that when what is assailed is the validity or constitutionality of a rule or regulation
issued by the administrative agency in the performance of its quasi-legislative function, the regular
courts have jurisdiction to pass upon the same.
The determination of whether a specific rule or setoff rules issued by an administrative agency
contravenes the law or the Constitution is within the jurisdiction of the regular courts.
B. Notice and Hearing
The right to notice and hearing is essential to due process and its non-observance will as a rule invalidate
the administrative proceedings.
The essence of due process in administrative proceeding is the opportunity to explain ones side or a
chance to seek reconsideration of the action or ruling complained of.
There are numerous authorities holding that denial of the right to notice and hearing will render the
administrative proceedings null and void for denial of due process.
- But it is not correct to say that this right is indispensable, for there are some instances when it
can be validly be omitted. ( Ex: urgency of immediate action, the tentativeness of the
administrative action & the fact that the right had previously been offered but not claimed.
1. Administrative Due Process
While administrative determinations of contested cases are by their nature judicial, there is no
requirement for strict adherence to technical rules as are observed in truly judicial proceedings.
Administrative tribunals exercising quasi-judicial powers are unfettered by the rigidity of certain
procedural requirements, subject to the observance of fundamental and essential requirements of due
process in justiciable cases presented before them.
It is essential that due process must be observed, for the requirements for fair play are not
applicable to judicial proceeding only.
Ang Tibay v. CIR, the following are the cardinal rights or principles to be observed in
administrative proceedings
1. The right to a hearing which includes the right of the party interested of affected to present his own
case and submit evidence in support thereof.
2. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented.
3. The tribunal must have something to support its decision.
4. The evidence must be substantial.
5. The decision must be rendered on evidence presented at the hearing, or at least contained in the
records and disclosed to the parties affected.
6. Judges must act on its or his own independent consideration of the law and facts of the
controversy, and not simply accept the views of a subordinate in arriving at a decision.
7. The court should, in all controversial questions, render its decision in such a manner that the parties
to the proceeding can know the various issues involved, and the reasons for the decisions
rendered.
The SC has since empathically pronounced that these cardinal rights or principles provided for in Ang
Tibay are not applicable to preliminary investigations, which are previously stressed , are not quasi-judicial
proceedings.
In administrative proceedings, procedural due process has been recognized to include the following:
1) The right to actual or constructive notice of the institution of proceedings which may affect a
respondents legal rights;
2) A real opportunity to be heard personally of with the assistance of counsel, to present witnesses
and evidences in ones favor, and to defend ones rights;
3) A tribunal vested with competent jurisdiction and so constituted as to afford a person charged
administratively a reasonable guarantee of honesty as well as impartiality;
4) A finding by said tribunal which is supported by substantial evidence submitted for consideration
during the hearing or contained in the records or made known to the parties affected.
it is established that the assistance of a counsel is not indispensable in administrative proceedings.
Thus
while investigations conducted by an administrative body may at times be akin to a criminal proceeding,
the fact remains that under existing laws, a party in an administrative inquiry may or may not be assisted
by counsel, irrespective of the nature of the charges and respondents capacity to represent himself, and
no duty rests on such body to furnish the person being investigated with counsel.
Thus, the right to counsel is not imperative in administrative investigations because such inquiries are
conducted merely to determine whether there are facts that merit disciplinary measures against erring
public officers and employees, with the purpose of maintaining the dignity of government service.
Moreover, in administrative cases, such as investigations of students found violating school discipline,
there are withal minimum standards which must be met before to satisfy the demands of procedural due
process and these are:
1) The students must be informed in writing of the nature and cause of any accusation against them
; on the administrative charges against him was irrefragably denied due process.
2) They shall have the right to answer the charges against them and with the assistance of counsel,
if desired;
3) They shall be informed of the evidence against them;
4) They shall have the right to adduce evidence in their own behalf;
5) The evidence must be duly considered by the investigating committee to hear and decdide the
case.
Therefore, where a party was afforded an opportunity to participate in the proceedings but failed to do so,
he cannot complain deprivation of due process.
Pefianco v. Moral- it was ruled that a respondent in an administrative case is not entitled to be informed
of the findings and recommendations of any investigating committee created to inquire into charges filed
against him -- he is entitled only to the administrative decisions based on substantial evidence made of
record, and a reasonable opportunity to meet the charges and the evidence presented against her during
the hearings of the investigation committee.
The SC has described the nature of quasi-judicial proceedings, in relation to the evaluation
process
Investigative process may be characterized as an investigative process in contrast to a
proceeding conducted in the exercise of an administrative bodys quasi-judicial power.
In administrative law, a quasi-judicial proceeding involves:
(a) taking and evaluation of evidence
(b) determining facts based on the evidence presented
(c) rendering an order or decision supported by the facts proved
The notice and hearing requirements of administrative due process cannot be dispensed with and shelved
aside.
At issue in the case of American Tobacco Co. v. Director of Patents was the power of the respondent to
delegate the hearing of cases to his subordinates. The petitioner pointed out that the law required the
respondent to personally hear and decide such cases, hence the administrative regulation assigning
these to hearing officers was invalid. The SC did not agree, noting that there was no provision in RA No.
165 or 166 withholding from the Director of Patents the authority to designate hearing officers. It could
hardly be expected, so reasoned Justice Antonio, in view of the magnitude of his responsibility, to require
him to hear personally everyday case pending in his office. This would leave him little time to attend to
his other duties.
Due process in an administrative proceedings similar to those in the courts of justice; and need not
necessarily include the right cross examination.
The requirement of notice and hearing does not connote full adversarial proceedings. Submission of
position papers may be sufficient for as long as the parties thereto are given the opportunity to be heard.
In Montoya, the Court considered the Summary Dismissal Proceedings against the petitioner as flawed
from the very beginning when these were conducted without due notice to him. The NCR Regional
Director, never contested the fact that the Hearing Officer proceeded with his investigation without giving
notice to Montoya. Without notice, Montoya was unable to attend the hearings, present written or oral
arguments, and submit evidence in his favour; he was completely deprived of the opportunity to be heard
In administrative proceedings, the quantum of proof necessary for a finding of guilt is only substantial
evidence. Substantial evidence means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as
adequate to support a conclusion. It means evidence which affords a substantial basis from which the
fact in issue can be reasonably inferred.
C. Administrative Appeals and Review
Unless otherwise provided by law or executive order, an appeal from a final decision of the administrative
agency may be taken to the Department Head, whose decision may further be brought to the regular
courts of justice, in accordance with the procedure specified by the law.
Section 7, Art. IX[A] of the 1987 Constitution in part substantially provides that any decision , order or
ruling of any of the Constitutional Commisions may be brought for review to the SC on certiorari within 30
days from receipt of a copy thereof.
D. Enforcement of Decision
E. Res Judicata
General Rule: an administrative decision is not considered res judicata so as to preclude its subsequent
reconsideration or revocation.
The aforestated general rule has however been modified in this jurisdiction.
It is now well-settled in our jurisprudence that the decisions and orders of administrative agencies,
rendered pursuant to their quasi-judicial authority, have, upon their finality, the force and binding effect of
a final judgment within the purview of the doctrine of res judicata. The principle of res judicata applies as
well to the judicial and quasi-judicial acts of public, executive or administrative offices and boards acting
within their jurisdiction as to the judgments of courts having general judicial powers.
CHAPTER 6- JUDICIAL REVIEW
General Rule
An administrative decision may be appealed to the courts of justice only if the Constitution or the law
permits it or if the issues to be reviewed involve questions of law. Outside of these exceptions, the
administrative decision is no more reviewable by the courts of justice than are judicial decisions
reviewable by administrative bodies. The right to appeal is not a constitutional right nor is it embraced in
the right to be heard as guaranteed by due process. As a rule, therefore, the administrative decision may
be validly rendered final and inappealable at the administrative level without allowing the aggrieved party
a final resort to the courts of justice.
It is recognized principle that courts of justice will generally not interfere in executive and
administrative matters which are addressed to the sound discretion of government agencies, such as the
grant of licenses, permits, leases or the approval, rejection or revocation of application therefor.
-Exhaustion must be raised at the earliest possible time, even before filing the answer to the complaint
or pleading asserting a claim, by a motion to dismiss; otherwise, such a ground for dismissal would be
deemed waived.
-If a remedy is available within the administrative machinery, this should be resorted to before resort can
be made to the courts.

It is generally true that purely administrative and discretionary functions may not be interfered Reasons for this doctrine:
with by the courts; but when the exercise of such functions by the administrative officer is tainted by a
failure to abide by the command to set matters right, with the incumbent on the courts to set matters right, a. The administrative superiors, if given the opportunity, can correct the errors committed by their
with the Supreme Court having the last say on the matter. subordinates.

In the case of the constitutional commissions, it is provided that unless otherwise provided in this
Constitution or by law, any decision, order or ruling of each Commission may be brought to the Supreme
Court on certiorari by the aggrieved party within 30 days from receipt of a copy thereof.
It should be stressed that only final orders, rulings and decisions of these constitutional commissions
rendered in the exercise of their adjudicatory or quasi-judicial powers may be subject to said appeals.
It should be noted as well, for purposes of appeals, distinctions may also be made with respect to
questions of law and questions of fact.
b. Courts should as much as possible refrain from disturbing the findings of administrative bodies
in deference to the doctrine of separation of powers.
c. On practical grounds, it is best that the courts, which are burdened enough as they are wit judicial
cases, should not be saddled with the review of administrative cases.
d. Judicial review of administrative cases is usually effected through the special civil actions of
certiorari, mandamus, and prohibition, which are available only if there is no other plain, speedy,
and adequate remedy.

A question of law exist when the doubt or difference centers on what the law is on a certain state of facts. -The rule applies only where there is an express legal provision requiring such administrative step as a
A question of facts exists if the doubt centers on the truth or falsity of the alleged facts. condition precedent to taking action in court.

When it comes to questions of law, administrative decisions thereon are appealable to the courts of justice Exceptions:
even without legislative permission
1. Where there is estoppel on the part of the party invoking the doctrine.
Decisions of Civil Service Commission may, under the provision of RA 7902, be brought to the Court of
2. Where the challenged administrative act is patently illegal, amounting to lack of jurisdiction.
Appeals for review.
3. Where there is unreasonable delay or official inaction that will irretrievably prejudice the
DOCTRINE OF EXAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
complaint.
-Calls for resort first to the appropriate administrative authorities in the resolution of a controversy falling
4. Where the amount involved is relatively small as to make the rule impractical and oppressive.
under their jurisdiction before the same may be elevated to the courts of justice for review.
5. Where the question raised is purely legal and will ultimately have to be decided by the courts of
- Non-observance of the doctrine does not affect the jurisdiction of the court and merely results in the lack
justice.
of cause of action, which is one of the grounds allowed by the Rules of Court for the dismissal of the
complaint. Issues of law cannot be resolved with finality by the administrative officer. It is properly
addressed to a regular court of justice rather than to an administrative body.
-Failure to exhaust administrative remedies may also constitute forum shopping which would likewise
result in a dismissal of a simultaneous resort to a regular court for purposes of obtaining relief. 6. Where judicial intervention is urgent.
When forum shopping exist? Both actions involve: 7. Where its application will cause great and irreparable damage.
- same transactions 8. Where the controverted acts violate due process.
-same essential facts and circumstances 9. When the issue of non-exhaustion of administrative remedies has been rendered moot.
-raise identical cause of action, subject matters, and issues 10. Where there is no other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy.

11. When strong public interest is involved.

 12. In quo warranto proceedings. -Findings of fact of administrative agencies and quasi-judicial bodies, which have acquired expertise
because their jurisdiction is confined to specific matters, are generally accorded not only great respect
Appeal to the President but even finality. They are binding in court unless there is a showing of grave abuse of discretion or where
it is clearly shown that they were arrived at arbitrarily or in utter disregard of the evidence on record.
Is the decision of a Cabinet member has to be appealed first to the President before it may be brought to
a court of justice? GENERAL RULE: Factual findings of administrative agencies that are affirmed by the court of appeals
are conclusive upon and generally not reviewable by the Supreme Court.
Answer: Jurisprudence has been rather seemingly indecisive on this matter. You can base it on these two
cases: EXCEPTIONS:
Demaisip vs. Court of Appeals: Appeal to the President was not necessary because the Cabinet member 1. When the findings are grounded entirely on speculation, surmises or conjectures.
was after all is alter ego, and under the doctrine of political agency, the acts of the secretary are the acts
of the President. 2. When the inference made is manifestly mistaken, absurd, or impossible.

Doctrine of qualified political agency- the acts of a department secretary, who is considered to 3. When there is grave abuse of discretion.
be an alter ego of the President, bear the implied or assumed approval of the latter, and are valid
unless the President actually disapproves them. 4. When the judgment is based on a misapprehension of facts.

Calo vs. Fuentes: Appeal to the President was the final step in the administrative process and therefore 5. When the findings of fact are conflicting.
a condition precedent to appeal to the courts. 6. When in making its findings, the Court of Appeals went beyond the issues of the case, or its
Questions Reviewable findings are contrary to the admissions of both the appellant and the appellee.

1. Question of fact 7. When the findings are contrary to the trial court.

2. Question of law 8. When the findings are conclusions without citation of specific evidence on which they are based.

QUESTION OF FACT
The administrative decision lies in the
discretion of the legislature, which may or
may not permit it as it sees fit. Denial of this
remedy does not violate due process for the
right to appeal is generally not deemed
embraced in the right to hearing .
The doubt or difference arises as to the truth
or the falsehood of the alleged facts.
Involve no examination of the probative value
of the evidence presented by the litigants or
any of them.
QUESTION OF LAW
The administrative decision may be appealed to
the courts of justice independently of legislative
permission or even against legislative
prohibition. The judiciary cannot be deprived of
its inherent power to review all decisions on
questions of law, whether made initially by
lower courts and more so by an administrative
body only.
The doubt or difference arises as to what the
law is on a certain state of facts.
9. When the facts set forth in the petition, as well as in the petitioners main and reply briefs, are
not disputed by the respondent.
10. When the findings of fact are premise on the supposed absence of evidence and contradicted
by the evidence on record.
11. When the Court of Appeals manifestly overlooked certain relevant facts not disputed by the
parties, which, if properly considered, would justify a different conclusion.
-Administrative bodies may be allowed to resolve questions of law in the exercise of their quasi-judicial
function as an incident of their primary power of regulation. However, their determination on this matter
is only tentative at best and may be reviewed and reversed by the courts in proper cases whenever
necessary.
-The decision of legal questions is an essentially judicial power that may not be withheld or withdrawn
from the courts by legislation.
-As a rule, it is only the judicial tribunal that can interpret and decide questions of law with finality.

-Courts may and will, with more freedom, annul administrative interpretations of law and substitute their
own reading of the statute under consideration if they believe it has not been correctly applied.
Can the appellate court determine the issue raised without reviewing or evaluating evidence?

Yes= Question of law

No= Question of fact
Chapter 1: The Concept of the Public Officer There is no vested right to speak of.

Public office- the right, authority, and duty, created and conferred by law, by which for a given period, Due process is available to the public officer, however, in the sense that he cannot be
either fixed by law or enduring at the pleasure of the creating power, an individual is invested with some deprived of his office without a clear expression of the legislative will.
portion of the sovereign functions of the state to be exercised by him for the benefit of the body politic.
Where salary has already been earned by the public officer, it becomes private property
Officer- a person whose duties, not being of a clerical or manual nature, involves the exercise of discretion entitled to the protection of due process.
in the performance of the functions of the government.
Classificatiion:
Public officer- any person who, by direct provision of the law, popular election or appointment by
competent authority, shall take part in the performance of public functions in the Government of the As to nature of functions:
Philippine Islands, or shall perform in said Government or in any of its branches, public duties as an
employee, agent or subordinate official, of any rank or class. (Revised Penal Code) a. Civil office it covers any kind of a public office, whether executive, legislative, or
judicial.
Elements of Public Office
b. Military office
a. It must be created by law or by authority of law.
2. As to creation:
b. It must possess a delegation of a portion of the sovereign powers of government, to be exercised
a. Constitutional office
for the benefit of the public.
b. Statutory office
c. The powers conferred and the duties to be discharged must be defined, directly or impliedly, by
the legislature or through legislative authority. 3. As to the department of government to which it belongs:
d. The duties must be performed independently and without control of a superior power other than a. Legislative office
the law unless they be those of an inferior or subordinate office created or authorized by the
legislature, and by it placed under the general control of a superior office or body. b. Executive office

e. It must have some permanence and continuity and not be only temporary o occasional. c. Judicial office

Characteristics: 4. As to branch of government served:

1. A public office is a public trust. a. National office

It must be discharged by the incumbent not for his own personal aggrandizement but for the b. Local office
benefit of the public.
5. As to whether exercise of discretion is required:

a. Quasi-judicial office / Discretionary

2. A public office is not a hereditable possession.
b. Ministerial office
It is personal to the incumbent and is not to be considered as property which can be passed
on to his heirs. 6. As to compensation:

a. Lucrative office, office of profit, or office coupled with an interest. It includes any office
to which salary, compensation or fees are attached.
3. A public office is not property and is outside the commerce of man.
b. Honorary office no compensation.
It cannot be the subject to a contract.
7. As to the legality of the office

a. De jure
4. Not being a property, public office is not protected by the due process clause.
b. De facto
 8. As to how selected to public office -An acting appointment is essentially a temporary appointment which is revocable in character.

a. Appointive Pimentel vs. Ermita:

b. Elective - The power to appoint is essentially executive in nature, and the legislature may not interfere with
the exercise of this executive power, except in those instances when the Constitution allows it
Chapter 2: Requirements for Public Office to interfere. Limitations on the executive power to appoint are construed strictly against the
legislature.
APPOINTIVE ELECTIVE
- The essence of an appointment in an acting capacity is its temporary nature. It is a stop-gap
Occupy office by virtue of Occupy office by virtue of the
measure intended to fill an office for a limited time until the appointment of a permanent occupant
their designation thereto by mandate of the electorate.
to the office. In case of vacancy in an office occupied by an alter ego of the President, such as
an appointing authority.
the office of a department secretary, the President must necessarily appoint an alter ego of her
Prohibited to engage in any Allowed to take part in any choice as acting secretary before the permanent appointee of her choice could assume office.
partisan political activity or political and electoral
Bautista vs. Salonga:
take part in any election. activities.
- Since the position of the Commission on Human Rights is not among the positions mentioned in
the first sentence of Section XVI, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution, appointments to which are
The President is authorized to appoint the following: to be made with the confirmation of COA, it follows that the appointment by the President of the
chairman of CHR is to be made without the review or participation of COA.
Confirmation by the Commission on Appointments is required.
Quintos-Deles vs. Commission on Appointments:
1. Heads of the executive departments.
- Appointment as sectoral representative in the House of Representatives required confirmation
2. Ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls. by the COA.

3. Officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain. Soriano III vs. Lista:

4. Those other officers whose appointments are vested in him by the Constitution.
Confirmation by the Commission on Appointments is NOT required.
5. All other officers of the government whose appointments are not provided for by law,
6. Those whom he may be authorized by law to appoint.
Appointment- the act of designation by the appointing officer, body or board, to whom that power has
been delegated, of the individual who is to exercise the functions of a given office.
- With respect to naval captains in the Philippine Coast Guard, which was, by Executive Order,
removed from the ambit of the Philippine Armed Forces and placed under the authority of the
Department of Transportation and Communication. It does not require confirmation by the COA.
Limitations of the Presidents Appointing Power:
1. The spouse and relatives by consanguinity or affinity within the fourth civil degree of the
President shall not during his tenure be appointed as Members of the Constitutional
Commissions, or to the Office of the Ombudsman, or as Secretaries, Undersecretaries,
chairmen or heads of bureaus or offices, including government-owned or controlled corporations
and their subsidiaries.

Designation- the mere imposition of additional duties on the officer to be performed by him in a special 2. Not make appointments within two months immediately before the next presidential elections
manner. and up to the end of his term.

APPOINTMENT DESIGNATION 3. Appointments of an Acting President shall remain effective, unless revoked by the elected
President within ninety days from is assumption or re-assumption of office.
Executive Legislative
Luego vs. Civil Service Commission:
Permanent Temporary
- Appointment is an essentially discretionary power and must be performed by the officer in which
it is vested according to his best lights, the only condition being that the appointee should posses
 the qualifications required by law. The Court should not substitute its own judgment to that of the
appointing authority.
- Appointment is essentially discretionary and cannot be controlled even by the courts as long as
it is properly and not arbitrarily exercised by the appointing authority.
- The CSC is not empowered to determine the kind or nature of the appointment extended by the
appointing officer, its authority being limited to approving or reviewing the appointment in the
light of the requirements of the Civil Service law. When the appointee is qualified and all other
legal requirements are satisfied, the Commission has no choice but to attest to the appointment
in accordance with the Civil Service laws.
Gayatao vs. Civil Service Commission:
- While the Civil Service Commission has no authority to revoke an appointment on the ground
that another person is more qualified, its authority being limited to approving or renewing an
appointment in the light of the requisites of the law governing the Civil Service, it is within its
power to order the reinstatement of government employees who have been unlawfully
dismissed.
Andaya vs. Regional Trial Court, Cebu City, Branch 20:
- As deputy of the National Police Commission, the authority of the mayor is very limitedin
reality, he has no power of appointing and has only the limited power of selecting one from
among the list of eligible to be named chief of police. The mayor cannot require the Regional
Director, Regional Police Command, to include the name of any officer, no matter how qualified,
in the list of five to be submitted to the mayor.
Lacson vs. Romero:
- The appointment to a government post like that of provincial fiscal to be complete involves
several steps. First, comes the nomination of the President. Then to make that nomination valid
and permanent, the COA has to confirm said nomination. The last step is the acceptance thereof
by the appointee by his assumption of office.
- The only recognized instance when an individual can be compelled to accept an appointive office
is in connection with the defense of the State.
Election- a mode of filling a public office, by which the enfranchised citizenry is as able to participate
directly in the conduct of the government, through the selection by them of the functionaries who will
represent them therein.
Vacancies
a. Original- an office is created and no one has as yet been close to fill in.
b. Constructive- incumbent has no legal right to the office and may be legally replaced by another.=
c. Accidental- incumbent is separated by any mode other than expiration of the term.
d. Absolute- term of the incumbent having expired, no successor has legally qualified to replace
him.
Costin vs. Quimbo:
- There can be no appointment to a non-vacant position. The incumbent must first be legally
removed or his appointment validly terminated.
Qualifications
1. Qualification as an Endowment- qualities required of the public officer to insure the proper
discharge of his duties.
Monsanto vs. Factoran:
- The pardon granted to the petitioner has resulted in removing her disqualification from holding
public employment but it cannot go beyond that. To regain her post as assistant city treasurer,
she must re-apply and undergo the usual procedure required for a new appointment.
Garcia vs. Chairman of Commission on Audit:
- If the pardon is based on the innocence of the individual, or if executive clemency is granted to
cover the administrative charges for the same acts for which he was prosecuted (and later
acquitted because he was found not to have committed the offense imputed to him) in criminal
proceedings, he no longer needs to apply for reinstatement to his former position.
Civil Liberties Union vs. the Executive Secretary:
- Declared as unconstitutional EO 284 which, in effect, allowed Cabinet members, their
undersecretaries and assistant secretaries and other appointive officials of the Executive
Department to hold other positions in the government albeit subject to the limitations imposed
therein.
Caasi vs. Court of Appeals:
- The law requires that the candidate who is a green card holder must have waived his status as
a permanent resident or immigrant of a foreign country. Therefore, his act of filing a certificate
of candidacy for elective office in the Philippines did not itself constitute a waiver of his status as
permanent resident or immigrant of the US. The waiver of his green cars should be manifested
by some act or acts independent of and done prior to filing his candidacy for elective office in
the country. Without such prior waiver, he was disqualified to run for any elective office.
Who may prescribe qualifications?
-By the constitution or by statute
* Constitutional and statutory provisions fix the qualifications of persons who may be eligible for
certain elective public officers. Said requirements may neither be enlarged nor reduced by mere
agreements between private parties.
Limitations on the power of the legislature to prescribe qualifications:
 a. The legislature may not reduce or increase the qualifications prescribed in an exclusive manner - An officer de facto is one whose acts, though not those of a lawful officer, the law, upon principles
by the Constitution. of policy and justice, will hold valid so far as they involve the interest of the public and third
persons, where the duties of the office were exercised:
b. The legislature may only prescribe general qualifications.
o Without a known appointment or election, but under such circumstances of reputation
c. The qualifications must be relevant to the office for which they are prescribed. or acquiescence as were calculated to induce people, without inquiry, to submit to or
invoke his action, supposing him to be the officer he assumes to be.
Duration of Qualifications:

- The prescribed qualifications should be possessed at the earliest on the date indicated by the
Constitution or the law. o Under color of a known and valid appointment or election, but where the officer had
failed to conform to some precedent, requirement, or condition, as to take an oath, give
- In the case of justices of the Supreme Court and the judges of inferior courts, it suffices if the
a bond, or the like.
qualifications are possessed not necessarily on the date of appointment or election but at the
time of assumption of office.

- -Eligibility to an office should be construed as of a continuing nature and must exist at the
commencement of the term and during occupancy of the office. The moment any of such
qualifications is lost during tenure, the right to the office is also automatically forfeited
2. Qualification as an Act- taking an oath or filing a bond.
o Under the color of a known appointment or election, void, because the officer was not
eligible, or because there was a want of power in the electing or appointing body, or by
reason of some defect or irregularity in its exercise, such ineligibility, want of power, or
defect being unknown to the public.

- An oath of office is a qualifying requirement for a public office; a prerequisite to the full investiture
with the office. It is only when the public officer has satisfied the prerequisite of oath that his right o Under color of an election or appointment by or pursuant to a public, unconstitutional
to enter into the position becomes plenary and complete. However, once proclaimed and duly law before the same is adjudged to be such.
sworn in office, a public officer is entitled to assume office and to exercise the functions thereof.
DE JURE DE FACTO
Failure to Qualify
Has title. Has color of title.
- Mere delay in qualifying does not result in automatic forfeiture of the office.
Validly appointed. One who is in possession of
- Statutes requiring the taking of an oath, like those which require also the giving of a bond, usually the office and discharging its
require that it shall be done within a specified time. These statutes, however, are generally duties derived from election or
construed to be directory merely and not mandatory, and mere delay in taking the oath, if it be appointment, however
afterwards taken with the approval of the public authorities, while it may be ground for a forfeiture irregular or informal.
while the delay continues, does not amount ipso facto to a rejection of the office, and when the
oath is so taken, the default is waived.

- Where the law requires qualification within a specified time and adds that failure to qualify during Elements of a de facto officer:
that period will result in automatic loss of the right to the office. This consequence will follow
whatever the reason for the delay, even if such reason is tenable. 1. There must be a de jure office.

Chapter 3: De Facto Officers There can be no de facto officer where there is no de jure office, although there may be a
de facto officer in a de jure office.
Rationale: The members of the public dealing with the government are not supposed to verify the
credentials of every functionary exercising official functions. They have the right to presume that he is the There is no such thing as a de facto office.
officer he assumes to be.
2. There must be color of right or general acquiescence by the public.
De facto officer- no valid title to the position he is holding but appears to be the officer he assumes to be.
3. There must be actual physical possession of the office in good faith.
State vs. Carroll:
There cannot be a de facto judge when there is a de jure judge in the actual performance
of the duties of the office.
Effects of acts of de factor officers: one (1) Chairman and two (2)
COMPOSITION:
Commissioners
- The lawful act of an officer de facto, so far as the rights of third persons are concerned, are, if
done within the scope and by the apparent authority of the office, considered as valid and binding - Natural born citizen
as if he were the officer legally elected and qualified for the office and in full possession thereof.
- At least 35 years at the time of
- The de facto officer cannot benefit from his own status because public policy demands that their appointment
unlawful assumption of public office be discouraged. The individual is bound to verify his title to
an office. If the title is doubtful, he enters the office at his own risk and must be preferred to QUALIFICATIONS - With proven capacity for public
suffer all adverse consequences that may befall him by reason of his anomalous status. OF MEMBERS administration

GENERAL RULE: The rightful incumbent of a public office may recover from an officer de facto the salary - Must not have been candidates
received by the latter during the time of his wrongful tenure, even though he entered into the office in for any elective position in the
good faith and under color of title. elections immediately preceding
their appointment.
EXCEPTIONS:
APPOINTED BY: the President
1. Having thus been duly proclaimed senator and having assumed office as required by law, it
cannot be disputed that defendant is entitled to the compensation, emoluments, and allowances TERM: 7 years, without reappointment
which our Constitution provides for the position. The emoluments must go to the person who
rendered the service unless the contrary is provided. MODE OF
impeachment, only
REMOVAL:
2. There is authority to the effect that de facto officer may retain salaries collected by him for
services rendered in good faith where there is no de jure officer claiming the office.

3. A de facto public officer cannot be made to reimburse funds disbursed during his term of office
because his acts are as valid as those of a de jure officer. As a de facto officer, he is entitled to
Pertinent constitutional provisions:
emoluments for actual services rendered.
SECTION 1, ARTICLE XI. Public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must at all times
- The incumbency of the de facto officer may not be challenged collaterally or in an action to which
be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency, act
he is not a party but in a direct proceeding where title to the office will be the principal issue.
with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives.
- Quo warranto to be filed by the Solicitor General in the nature of the Republic or by any other
SECTION 3, ARTICLE IX (B). The Civil Service Commission, as the central personnel agency of the
person claiming title to the office.
Government, shall establish a career service and adopt measures to promote morale, efficiency, integrity,
Civil Service Commission (CSC) responsiveness, progressiveness, and courtesy in the civil service. It shall strengthen the merit and
rewards system, integrate all human resources development programs for all levels and ranks, and
The governments central personnel agency designated to set standards and to enforce the laws institutionalize a management climate conducive to public accountability. It shall submit to the President
and rules governing the selection, utilization, training and discipline of civil servants. and the Congress an annual report on its personnel programs.

Embraces all branches, subdivisions, - Above mentioned provisions are supported by the Civil Service Decree (PD 807)
instrumentalities and agencies of the
Government; including GOCCs with Civil Service laws are not enacted to penalize anyone. They are designed to eradicate the system of
original charters. appointment to public office based on political considerations and to eliminate as far as practicable the
SCOPE: element of partisanship, and personal favoritism in making appointments. These laws intend to establish
a merit system of fitness and efficiency as the basis of appointment; to secure more competent
employees, and thereby promote better government.
Includes employees of the above
mentioned employees Appointments in the civil service be made only through merit and fitness to be determined by competitive
examinations.
 GOCCs without original charter and public charitable institutions although performing public functions, shall exceed one year, and performs or accomplishes the specific work or job, under his own
are not governed by CSC rules. responsibility with minimum of direction and supervision from the hiring agency; and

POSITIONS IN CIVIL SERVICE 5. Emergency and seasonal personnel.

a. Career; b. Non-career Security of tenure (except to 1st and 2nd rank CSC employees) pertains only to rank and not to the office
or to the position to which they may be appointed.
Career Service
Eligibility
1. Open career positions prior qualification in an appropriate examination is required.
Civil service eligibility is needed to be appointed to any position in the civil service when an eligible is
2. Closed career positions scientific or highly technical in nature; (e.g. State college faculty and actually available for and ready to accept appointment.
academic staff, technical positions on scientific or research institutions *has their own merit
system*) PD 907 grants civil service eligibility for summa cum laude, magna cum laude and cum laude graduates.

3. Positions in the Career Executive Service refers to Undersecretary, Assistant Secretary,
Bureau Director, Assistant Bureau Director, Regional Director, Assistant Bureau Director, Chief
of Department Service and other officers of equivalent rank as may be identified by the Career
Executive Service Board, all of whom are appointed by the President.
4. Career officers, other than those Career Executive Service, who are appointed by the President
(e.g. Foreign Service Officers in DFA)
5. Commissioned officers and enlisted men of the AFP (separate merit system).
6. Personnel of GOCCs, whether performing governmental or proprietary functions, who do not fall
under the non-career service;
7. Permanent laborer, whether skilled, semi-skilled, or unskilled.
Appointments
- Shall be made according to merit and fitness.
- Exempted from competitive examination, positions which are:
o Policy-determining one charged with the laying down of principal or fundamental
guidelines or rules, such as that of a head of a department.
o Primarily confidential is one which denotes not only confidence in the aptitude of the
appointee for the duties of the office but primarily close intimacy which ensures freedom
of intercourse without embarrassment or freedom from misgivings or betrayals of
personal trust or confidential matters of state; or one declared to be so by the President
upon the recommendation of CSC.

Non-career service is characterized by: o Highly technical requires the appointee thereto to possess technical skill or training
in the supreme or superior degree.
1. Entrance on bases other than those of usual tests of merit and fitness utilized for the career
service; and 2 kinds:

2. Tenure which is limited to a period specified by law, or which is co-terminous with that of the 1. Permanent appointment issued to a person who meets all the requirements for the position to
appointing authority or subject to his pleasure, or which is limited to the duration of a particular which he is being appointed, including the appropriate eligibility prescribed, in accordance with
project for which purpose employment was made. the provisions of laws, rules and standards promulgated in pursuance thereof.

Non-career service includes:
1. Elective officials and their personal or confidential staff;
2. Department Heads and other officials of Cabinet rank who hold positions at the pleasure of the
President and their personal or confidential staff(s);
3. Chairman and members of commissions and boards with fixed terms of office and their personal
or confidential staff;
4. Contractual personnel or those whose employment in the government is in accordance with a
special contract to undertake a specific work or job, requiring special or technical skills not
available in the employing agency, to be accomplished within a specific period, which in no case
A person issued an original permanent appointment shall serve a probationary period
of six months during which he will undergo a thorough character investigation and may
be dropped from the service for unsatisfactory conduct or want of capacity.
Probationary employees cannot be terminated without just cause
This action is appealable to CSC
2. Temporary appointment issued to a person who meets all the requirements for the position to
which he is being appointed except the appropriate civil service eligibility.
For public interest, a vacancy must be filled
Shall not exceed for 12 months
 May be terminated without just cause Salary is merely incidental

GR: No fixed tenure; if with fixed tenure, he cannot be removed until such expiry. Next in rank rule the person next in rank shall be given preference in promotion when
the position immediately above his vacated.
Provisional appointments vs. Temporary appointments
This rule does not import any mandatory or peremptory requirement that the person next in rank must be
PROVISIONAL TEMPORARY appointed to vacancy. The appointing authority may by-pass the employee who is next-in-rank by
providing written reasons.
Issued upon the prior Given to a non-civil service
authorization of the CSC to a eligible is without a definite Promotion vs. Transfer
person who has not qualified tenure and is dependent
in a n appropriate upon the pleasure of the PROMOTION TRANSFER
examination but who appointing power.
otherwise meets the A scalar ascent of a senior A lateral movement from one
requirements for officer or employee to position to another of
appointment to a regular another position, higher equivalent rank, level or
position in the competitive either in rank or salary salary.
service, wherever a vacancy
occurs and the filling thereof
is necessary. Qualified next-in-rank an employee appointed on a permanent basis to a position previously
determined to be next-in-rank to vacancy proposed to be filled and who meets the requisites for
appointment thereto as previously determined by the appointing authority and approved by the
Regular appointment vs. ad interim appointment CSC.

REGULAR AD INTERIM Jurisdiction in contesting non-appointment / promotion:

Made during legislative Made during recess Department head -> CSC -> SC (by certiorari)
session
3. Transfer a movement from one position to another which is of equivalent rank, level or salary
Made only after the Made before the nomination without break in service involving the issuance of an appointment.
nomination is confirmed by is confirmed by COA Illegal transfer tantamount to removal without cause.
the COA
Connotes an absolute relinquishment of an office in exchange for another office.
Once confirmed by COA, it Shall cease to be valid if
continues until the end of the disapproved by the COA or 4. Reinstatement any person who has been permanently appointed to a position in the career
term of the appointee upon the next adjournment of service and who has, through no delinquency or misconduct, been separated therefrom, may be
the Congress reinstated to a position in the same level for which he is qualified.

*Ad interim appointments may be disapproved by inaction of COA.
Personnel actions Any action denoting the movement or progress of personnel in the civil service.
1. Appointment through certification issued to a person who has been selected from a list of
qualified persons certified by the CSC from an appropriate register of eligible, and who meets
all the other requirements of the position.
2. Promotion A movement from one position to another with increase in duties and responsibilities
as authorized by law and usually accompanied by an increase in pay. The movement may be
from one organizational unit to another in the same department or agency.
Pardon granted to a person results in removing her disqualification from holding public
employment but it cannot go beyond that. To regain her former post, she must re-apply
and undergo the usual procedure required for a new appointment.
Reinstatement covers back wages
5. Reemployment
6. Detail a movement of an employee from one agency to another without the issuance of an
appointment and shall be allowed, only for a limited period in the case of employees occupying
professional, technical and scientific positions.
 7. Reassignment

Must not involvemay be reduction in rank 1. Grounds are the following but not limited to:

Must be for a definite period 1. Dishonesty intentional false statement of any material fact, or practicing or attempting to
practice any deception or fraud in securing his examination, registration, appointment or
8. Demotion movement from one position to another involving the issuance of an appointment registration.
with diminution in duties, responsibilities, status or rank which may or may not involve reduction
in salary. 2. Oppression

Demotions without cause tantamount to removal. 3. Neglect of duty

9. Separation 4. Misconduct in office a misconduct such as affects ones performance of his duties as an officer
and not such only as affects
Nepotism
5. his performance of his duties as a private individual.
- Favoritism toward relatives by the appointing authority.
Maladministration or willful internal neglect and failure to discharge the duties of the
- The prohibition in the law covers all appointments [and even designations] in the national, city office.
and municipal governments or in any branch or instrumentality thereof, including GOCCs, made
in favor of a relative of the appointing or recommending authority, or the chief of bureau or office, To constitute gross misconduct, it must be beyond allowance, inexcusable, flagrant and
or of the offices exercising immediate supervision over him. shameful.

- Up to 3rd degree of consanguinity and affinity. 6. Disgraceful and immoral conduct

- Exception (full report must be made to CSC in these appointments): 7. Being notoriously undesirable

1. Persons employed in a confidential capacity 8. Discourtesy in the course of official duties

2. Teachers 9. Inefficiency and in competence in the performance of official duties the manifest lack of
adequate ability and fitness for the satisfactory performance of official duties by reason of the
3. Physicians officers vices or vicious habits.
4. Members of the armed forces 10. Gross negligence negligence characterized by want of even slight care, acting or omitting to
act in a situation where there is a duty to act, not inadvertently but willfully and intentionally, with
- In case of the President, as provided by the constitution, (1) spouse or (2) relatives by
a conscious indifference to consequences in so far as other persons may be affected.
consanguinity or affinity to the 4th degree be appointed as:
11. Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude
1. Members of constitutional commissions
12. Falsification of official documents
2. Office of the Ombudsman
13. Habitual drunkenness
3. Secretaries / Undersecretaries of the Cabinet
14. Gambling
4. Chairmen or heads of bureaus or offices (including GOCCs and their subsidiaries)
15. Refusal to perform official duty or render overtime service
- A promotional appointment violating this rule against nepotism is rendered null and void.
16. Physical or mental incapacity due to immoral or vicious habits
Discipline
17. Willful to pay just debts or willful failure to pay taxes due to the government
Officers and employees of the government may be disciplined if they violate the public
trust and fail to serve with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency and act 18. Habitual tardiness
with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives.
2. Jurisdiction.
Department -> Merit Systems Protection Board -> CSC -> Supreme Court
Who may investigate and decide on disciplinary matters?
- Secretaries and heads of agencies and instrumentalities, provinces, cities and municipalities
(decisions are deemed final if the punishment is suspension and does not exceed 30 days / 30
days salary worth of penalty).
- Appealable to CSC
- A complaint may be directly filed with the Commission by a private citizen against a government
official or employee in which case it may hear and decide the case or it may deputize any
department or agency or official or group of officials to conduct the investigation.
- The bestowal of jurisdiction is deemed exclusive unless it is proved that such power is assigned
to another body.
Protest cases (CSC Resolution No. 89-779)
1. An appointment made in favor of another next-in-rank employee who is not qualified
2. An appointment made in favor of one who is not next-in-rank
3. An appointment made in favor of one who is appointed by transfer and not next-in-rank or by
reinstatement or by original appointment, if the employee making the protest is not satisfied with
the written special reason or reasons given by the appointing authority for such appointment.
- The CSC shall exercise final and exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by the
Merit Systems Board and the Civil Service Regional Offices including contested appointments
or promotions.
Presidential Commission Against Graft and Corruption (PCGG)
- (1) Chairman; (2) Commissioners
- Has jurisdiction over all administrative complaints involving graft and corruption filed in any form
or manner against presidential appointees including those with GOCCs.
- CSC shall confine itself to cases of graft and corruption involving one or a combination of the
following criteria:
o Presidential appointees with the rank equivalent to or higher than an Assistant Regional
Director
o The amount involved is at least 10 million
o Those which threaten grievous harm or injury to the national interest
o Those which may be assigned to it by the President.
For corruption cases
- Ombudsman
- Sandiganbayan
3. Procedure
- Complaint / letter
- Submission of personal evidences
- Reviewed by the board
- Judgment is rendered.
- Implementation of decision suspension, expulsion etc.
4. Preventive suspension
- May be issued upon petition / motu proprio
- Grounds: (a) dishonesty; (b) oppression; (3) grave misconduct; (4) neglect in the performance
of duty; or (5) If there are reasons that the respondent is guilty of the charges which would
warrant his removal from the service.
- Two kinds: (1) Preventive suspension pending investigation; and, (b) preventive suspension
pending appeal.
LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICER (De Leon)
pages 139-208
5. Decision
If the charges are not proved by the preponderance of evidence- the case shall be dismissed and the
respondent reinstated back salaries if preventively suspended.
Gloria vs. CA: the SC clarified that an officer who has been lawfully suspended from his office pending
investigation is not entitled to compensation for the period during which he was suspended even though
it be subsequently determined that the cause for which he was suspended was insufficient.
Employees who are considered preventively suspended pending appeal are entitled to payment for their
salaries if they are subsequently found innocent, especially if his aforesaid preventive suspension
exceeds 90 days, which is the maximum period allowed under the law.
If, after investigation, the preventively suspended public employees are founf to be innocent or culpable
of lesser offenses not punishable with suspension or dismissal, they must immediately be reinstated and
granted full back salaries corresponding to the period of their supension.
If found guilty, he may be penalized with suspension for not more than 1 month, or with a fine not
exceeding 30 days salary, in which case, the decision shall be final.
An appeal shall not stop the decision from being executory; and in case the penalty is suspension or
removal, the respondent shall be considered as been under preventice suspension during the pendency
of the appeal in the event he wins the appeal.
Malanyaon vs. Lising: the SC ruled that the heirs of an accused who died pending resolution of the criminal
case against him are not entitled to receive had his preventive suspension been lifted as a consequence
of his exoneration, because his death merely resulted in the dismissal of the charges against him, and
not in his acquittal.
In another case, the SC held that a civil servant is entitled to all pecuniary benefits, including her retirement
benefits if she was forced to go on leave, despite her lack of leave of credits, if the administrative charges
against her were later dismissed. It must be stated that being found liable for a lesser offense is not
equivalent to exoneration.
6. Appeal
The Civil Service Commission shall decide upon appeal all administrative disciplinary cases involving the
imposition of a penalty of suspension for more than 30 days, or fine in an amount exceeding 30 days
salary, demotion in rank or salary or transfer, removal, or dismissal from office.
The appeal shall be perfected within 15 days from receipt of the decision upon te filing of a notice of
appeal, and the submission of 3 copies of the appeal, and the submission of three copies of the
memorandum, proof of service of a copy of the appeal memorandum upon the disciplining office, proof of
payment of the appeal fee and certification of non-forum shopping.
An appeal sent by mail shall be deemed filed on the date shown by the postmark on the envelope which
shall be attached to the records of the case and in case of personal delivery, the date stamped thereon
by the proper office.
An appeal shall not stop the decision from being executory, and in case the penalty is suspension or
removal, the respondent shall be considered as having been under preventive suspension during the
pendency of the appeal, in the event that he wins the appeal.
Only 1 petition for reconsideration shall be allowed, and only on any of the following grounds:
a. new evidence has been discovered which materially affects the decision rendered or
b. the decision is not supported by the evidence on record or
c. errors of law or irregularities have been committed prejudicial to the interest of the respondent.
Sec. 80 of the Uniform Rules on the Administrative Cases in the Civil Service provides that-- the decision
of the Commission proper or its Regional Offices shall be immediately executory after 15 days from receipt
thereof, unless a motion for reconsideration is seasonably filed, in which case the execution of the
decision shall be held in abeyance.
Huertas vs. Gonzales: the SC clarified- The CSC was limited to the review of decision involving:
1) suspension for more than 30 days
2) fine in an amount exceeding 30 days salary
3) demotion in rank and salary
4) transfer, removal or dismissal from office
Decision, order or rulings of the CSC may be brought to the SC on certiorari by the aggrieved party within
39 days from receipt of a copy thereof.
the remedy of the aggrieved party from a resolution issued by the CSC is to file a petiotion for review
under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court within 15 days form notice of the resolution.
RIGHT TO SELF-ORGANIZATION
The Constitution provides that the "right of the people, including those employed in the public and privated
sectors, to form unions, associations, or societies for purposes not contrary to law, shall not be abridged.
Administrative Code, Sec. 38: all govrnement employees, including those in government employees,
including those in government-owned or controlled corporation with original charters, except members of
the Armed Forces of the Philippines, police officers, policemen, firemen and jail guards, can form, join or
assist employees' organizations of their own choosing for the furtherance and protection of their interests.
They can also form, in conjunction with appropriate government authorities, labor-management
committees, work councils and other forms of workers participation schemes to achieve the same
objectives. High level employees whose functions are not normally considered as policy-making or
managerial or whose duties are of a highly confidential nature shall not be eligible to join the organization
of rank-and-file government employees.
Government employees organizations shall register with the Civil Service Commission and the
Department of Labor and Employment, which shall jointly issue the pertinent certificates of registratio in
favor of said organizations, which, thereafter, with the support of the majority of the employees in their
respective organizational units, shall be entitled to be designated as the sole and exclusive
representatives of the employees.
Although civil servants are now given the right to organize, they may, however not stage strikes.
In Trade Unions of the Philippines and Allied Services vs. National Housing Corporation: the SC clarified
that even employees of the government-owned or controlled corporations without orginal charters may
avail themselves of the right to self-organzation under the Labor Code.
CHAPTER 5
AUTHORITY OF THE PUBLIC OFFICER
The authority of the publuc officer is derived from the people themselves conformably to the constitutional
principple that "the Philippines is a republican state.Sovereignty resides in the people and all government
authority emanates form them.
This authority is conferred upon him either by the Constitution itself or by statute.
A. Where Exercised
General Rule: the public officer may exercise his powers only within the territoril limits of his authority and
that any act performed outside that area will be null and void.
B. When Exercised
The public officer may exercise his authority only during his term of office; hence, any act performed by
him after such term will be considered invalid, EXCEPT where the he may be regarded as a de facto
officer.
As previously observed, an appointment made by the President to fill an anticipated vacancy occuring
after his term will be invalid even if the appointment itseld was made during his term.
C. How Exercised
The authority of the public officer should be strictly contrued, consitent with the principle that
representative government is a government of limited powers. Any doubt on this matter shall be resolved
in favor of the public and against the exercise of the authority claimed.
This is true in cases involving private interests, such as those protected by the bill of rights.
On the other hand, the fact that a particular power has not been expressly conferred does not necessarily
mean it is not possessed by the officer claiming it.
Such power may still be sustained under the Doctrine of necessary implication.
Doctrine of necessary implication- all powers necessary to the exercise of the power to expressly
granted are deemed impliedly granted as well.
The claim of power may also be justified on the ground that power is inherent. An example is the police
power, which may be asserted by the national legislature despite the absence constitutional vesture.
D. Effect of Exercise
As long as the public officer is authorized (and even if not, provided he is a de facto officer), his acts will
be regarded as valid. Such acts will produce legal effect and be considered binding upon the government
itself as the principal of the public officer.
Even if not previously authorized, the act may still be considered valid if it is subsequently ratified by the
government. However, only voidable acts may be ratified.
The principle of estoppel does not operate against the govermeent for the acts of its agents, and that it is
never estopped by any mistake or error on their part.
KINDS OF DUTIES
1) Discretionary - if the officer is allowed to determine how and when it is to be performed and to decide
this matter one way or the other and be riht either way.
Example: it is discretionary on the President to grant or withhold a pardon; and if he decides to extend it,
he also has a discretion to make it absolute or conditional.
-It must be stressed that the SC may, under the Constitution, now determine whether or not there has
been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
intrumentality of the government.
--> Exercise of Discretionary Power
it has been ruled that "an officer to whom discretion is entrusted cannot delegate it to another, the
presumption being that he was chosen because he was deemed fit and competent to exercise that
judgment and discretion, and unless the power to substitute another in his place has been given to him,
he cannot delegate his duties to another."
The rule is not absolute.
American Tobacco Co. v. Director of Patents : the issue in this case was the power of the respondent to
delegate the hearing of inter partes cases to his subordinates. The petitioner pointed out that the law
required the respondent to personally hear and decide such cases, hence the administrative regulation
assigning these to hearing officers are invalid. The SC did not agree, noting that there was no provision
in RA No. 165 or 166 withholding from the Director of Patents the authority to designate hearing officers.
May the exercise of discretion be compelled?
-It depends on the kind of discretion conferred upon the public officer. Thus, if he has been given the
discretion to act or not to act upon certain matter, his decision not to act upon certain matter, his decision
not to act cannot be subject of judicial reversal.
But if the duty is made imperative, as when a deadline is fixed for its discharge, and discretion is granted
only as to the manner of its exercise, then this duty may be compelled by the judicial process.
Where an administrative body simply refuses to take any action whatsoever, the court may issue a writ
of mandamus to compel it to take some action, but should not attempt to prescribe the action to be taken
and thereby control the discretion or judgment of the board or officer.
Discretion is not totally unlimited. It is restricted by the very qualities taht jsutified its confernment-- the
judgement and good sense of delegate. Hence, if these are not employed in the dischrage of the duty,
that is if the duty was perfomed arbitrarily or capricously, or with disregard of rights, there results what is
known as a grave abuse of discretion, which may be corrected by certiorari.
2) Ministerial- the officer is given little latitude in its discharge. According to Mechem, "the duty is
ministerial when the law exacting its dischrage prescribes and defines the time, mode and occasion of its
performance with such certainty that nothing is left for judgment or discretion.
Example: the duty of the tax collector to acknowldge payment by issuing oan official receipt in which the
blanks will simply be filled to indicate the date, name ofpayor, amount pain, manner of payment and the
like.
--> Exercised of Ministerial Duty
The exercise of which does not require the employment of discretion or judgment, it is susceptible to
delegation. What can be done by the delegate may be subdelegated by him to others. No particular
qualitfication is required for the discharge of this kind of duty because the law itself defines with precision
the occassion and manner of its exercise.
The ministerial duty can be compelled by judicial action. The ministerial duty must be performed in any
case and, if it is not, may be ordered performed by court of justice. And what may be required is specific
action, the partcular duty imposed by law, not merely general action.
If these ministerrial duties are not observed, then the discharge of the ministerial duty may be corrected
in an appropriate action, and the public officer will have no reason to complain because it is not his
discretion or judgment that is being disturbed.
CHAPTER 6
INHIBITIONS
As public office is a public trust, it must not be usded as an instrument for self-aggrandizement by the
person holding it. To insure against a contrary persuasion, the law imposes upon him certain inhibitions
in the discharge of his office.
> Inhibition- a restraint upon the public officer against the doing of certain acts which may legally be done
by others. Crime is therfore excluded.
>Disqualification- the lack of needed eligibility for certain office.
Inhibitions are prescribed either by the Constitution or by statute and may be general or specific in their
application.
A. Constitutional Inhibition
1) The President and Vice-President shall not receive during their tenure any other emolument from the
Government or any other source.
2) The President, Vice-President, the Members of the Cabinet, and their deputies or assistants shall not,
unless otherwise provided in the Constitution, hold any other office or employment during their tenure.
They shall not, during said tenure, directly or indirectly practice any other profession, participate in any
business or be financially interested in any contrat with, or in any franchise, or special privilege granted
by the government or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof.
3) No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may hold any other office or employment in
the Government, or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including GOCC or their
subsidiaries, during his term without forfeiting his seat.
4) No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may personally appear as counsel before any
court of justice or before the Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies. Neither
shall he, directly or indirectly, be interested financially in any contract with, or in any franchise or special
privilege granted by the Government, or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including any
government-owned or controlled corporation, or its subsidiary, during his term of office. He shall not
intervene in any matter before any office of the Government for his pecuniary benefit or where he may be
called upon to act on account of his office.
5) No member of a Constitutional Commission shall, during his tenure, hold any other office or
employment. Neither shall he engage in the practice of any profession or in the active management or
control of any business which, in any way, may be affected by the functions of his office, nor shall he be
financially interested, directly or indirectly, in any contract with, or in any franchise or privilege granted by
the Government, any of its subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities, including government-owned or
controlled corporations or their subsidiaries.
6) No officer or employee in the civil service shall engage, directly or indirectly, in any electioneering or
partisan political campaign.
7) No elective official shall be eligible for appointment or designation in any capacity to any public office
or position during his tenure.
Unless otherwise allowed by law or by the primary functions of his position, no appointive official shall
hold any other office or employment in the Government or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality
thereof, including Government-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries.
8) No elective or appointive public officer or employee shall receive additional, double, or indirect
compensation, unless specifically authorized by law, nor accept without the consent of the Congress, any
present, emolument, office, or title of any kind from any foreign government.
9) No loan, guaranty, or other form of financial accommodation for any business purpose may be granted,
directly or indirectly, by any government-owned or controlled bank or financial institution to the President,
the Vice-President, the Members of the Cabinet, the Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Constitutional
Commissions, the Ombudsman, or to any firm or entity in which they have controlling interest, during their
tenure.
B. Constitutional Disqualification
> The spouse and relatives by consanguinity or affinity within the fourth civil degree of the President shall
not, during his tenure, be appointed as Members of the Constitutional Commissions, or the Office of the
Ombudsman, or as Secretaries, Undersecretaries, chairmen or heads of bureaus or offices, including
government-owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries.
>No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may hold any other office or employment in the
Government, or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or
controlled corporations or their subsidiaries, during his term without forfeiting his seat. Neither shall he be
appointed to any office which may have been created or the emoluments thereof increased during the
term for which he was elected.
>The Members of the Supreme Court and of other courts established by law shall not be designated to
any agency performing quasi-judicial or administrative functions.
C. Other inhibitions
1) No officer or employee of the governement shall purchase directly or indirectly any property sold by
the government for non-payment of any tax, fee or any other public charge. Any such purchase shall be
void.
2) Even if allowed by law or the by the primary functions of his position, a member of the Cabinet,
undersecretary, assistant secretary or other appointive official of the Executive Department may hold not
more than two positions in the government and government corporations and recieve the corresponding
compensation therefor: Provided, that this limitation shall not apply to ad hoc bodies or committees, or to
boards, councils or bodies of which the President is the Chairman
3) No judge or judicial officer shall not sit in any case in which he, or his wife or child, is pecuniarily
interested as heir, legatee, creditor or otherwise, or in which he is related to either party within the sixth
degree of consanguinity ir affinity, or to counsel within the fourth degree, computed according to the rules
of the civil law, or in which he has been executor, administrator, guardian, trustee or counsel or in which
he has presided in any inferior court when his ruling or decision is the subject of review, without the written
consent of all parties in interest, signed by them and entered upon the record.
4) No judge or other official or employee of the superior courts or of the office of the solicitor general shall
engage in private practice as a member of the bar or give professional advice to clients.
5) No chairman or commissioner of the COMELEC shall sit in any case in which he hsa manifested bias
or prejudice or antagonism against any party thereto and in connection therewith, or in any case in which
he would be disqualified under the rules of Court.the
6) The Chairman and the Members of the Commission on Human rights shall not, during their tenure,
hold any other office or employment. Neither shall they engage in the practice of any profession or in the
active management or control of any business which in any way will be affected by the functions of their
office, nor shall they be financially interested, directly or indirectlym in any contract with, or in any franchise
or privilege granted by the govenrment, or any of its subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities, including
GOCC.
7) It shall be unlawful for any local government official or employee, directly or indirectly, to:
(1) Engage in any business transaction with the local government unit in which he is an
official or employee or over which he has the power of supervision, or with any of its authorized boards,
officials, agents, or attorneys, whereby money is to be paid, or property or any other thing of value is
to be transferred, directly or indirectly, out of the resources of the local government unit to such person
or firm;
(2) Hold such interests in any cockpit or other games licensed by a local government unit.
(3) Purchase any real estate or other property forfeited in favor of such local government
unit for unpaid taxes or assessment, or by virtue of a legal process at the instance of the said local
government unit.
(4) Be a surety for any person contracting or doing business with the local government unit
for which a surety is required; and
(5) Possess or use any public property of the local government unit for private purposes.
8) All governors, city and municipal mayors are prohibited from practicing their profession or
engaging in any occupation other than the exercise of their functions as local chief executives.
Sanggunian members may practice their professions, engage in any occupation, or teach in
schools except during session hours:Provided, That Sanggunian members who are also members of
the Bar shall not:
(1)Appear as counsel before any court in any civil case wherein a local government unit
or any office, agency, or instrumentality of the government is the adverse party;
(2)Appear as counsel in any criminal case wherein an officer or employee of the national or
local government is accused of an offense committed in relation to his office.
(3)Collect any fee for their appearance in administrative proceedings involving the local
government unit of which he is an official; and
(4) Use property and personnel of the government except when the Sanggunian member
concerned is defending the interestof the government. (c) Doctors of medicine may practice their
profession even during official hours of work only on occasions of emergency: Provided, That the
officials concerned do not derive monetary compensation therefrom
OTHER DISQUALIFICATIONS
All appointments in the national, provincial, city and municipality government or in any branch or
instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled corporations, made in favor of a
relative, within the third degree of consanguinity or afinity, of the appointing or recommending authority,
or of the chief of the bureau or office, or of the persons exercising immediate supervision over him, are
prohibited. This restriction shall however not apply to persons employed in a confidential capacity;
teachers; physicians; members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines; and to those who, afther their
appointment to a position in a bureau or office, contracts marriage with someone in the same bureau or
office, in which event the employement or retention therein of both husband and wife may be allowed.
The following persons are disqualified from running for any elective local position:
a) Those sentenced by final judgment for an offense involving moral turpitude or for an
offense punishable by one (1) year or more of imprisonment, within two (2) years after serving
sentence;
(b) Those removed from office as a result of an administrative case;
(c) Those convicted by final judgment for violating the oath of allegiance to the
Republic;
(d) Those with dual citizenship;
(e) Fugitives from justice in criminal or nonpolitical cases here or abroad;
(f) Permanent residents in a foreign country or those who have acquired the right to
reside abroad and continue to avail of the same right after the effectivity of this Code; and
(g) The insane or feeble-minded.
EFFECTS OF VIOLATION
Sactions for the violation of the inhibition will depend upon the law imposing ut or implementing
the constitutional restriction. For example, the constitutional inhibition of the president against receiving
during his tenure any other emolument from the government or any other source has not been
implemented by statute. In this case, the usual judicial remedies cab ve employed, such as a petition to
prohibit the payment of the unlawful compensation, not to mention the process of impeachment
sanctioned by Article XI of the Constitution. Breaches of the statutory inhibitions are usually made penal
offenses and punished accordingly or may be considered administrative grounds for discipline. For
example, ubder the Local Government Code if 1991, any local official who violates the provisions thereof
on engaging in prohibited business transactions or possessing illegal pecuniary interest shall be punished
with imprisonment for six months and one day to six years, or a fine of not less than Three thousand
pesos or more than Ten thousand pesos, or both such fine and imprisonment, at the discretion of the
court.
CHAPTER 7
SALARY AND REQUISITES
Compensation and prerequisites are attached to public office for a number of reasons. For one
thing, they are intended to attract competent men to the government service, which they would not
otherwise join if they were required to devote their time and efforts for free. For another, remuneration, if
adequate, will lessen the temptation for graft as there would be little need for the public officer to augment
his income through illegal methods. (This, in fact, is why the more sensitive the office, the higher the
salary.) Another purpose would be to lend the necessary prestige to the office, as where the head of state
is provided with an official residence where he may recieve visiting dignitaries, especially from foreign
countries. Most important of all, of course, is the necessity to pay, and indeed reward, the public officer
for the loyal and dedicated service rendered by him to the people and, by so doing, improve his motivation
and efficiency.
SALARY
Contrary to common impression, salary is not an essential element of a public office. In fact,
there is such a thing as an honorary office, to which no compensation is attached and where the
incumbent is prepared and willing to serve gratis. Even so, this is the expectation rather than the rule as
the majority of public funtionaries cannot, because of their economic necessities, afford such generosity.
SOURCE OF SALARY
The salary of a public officer may be provided by the Constitution or by statute. For example,
Section 17 of the transitory Provisions of the Constitution provides that, "unless the Congress provides
otherwise, the President shall recieve an annual salary of three hundred thousand pesos; Vise- President,
the president of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court, two hundred forty thousand pesos each; the Senators, the Members of the House of
Representatives, the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, and the Chairmen of the Constitutional
Commisions, Two hundred four thousand pesos each; and the Members of the Constitutional
Commissions, one hundred eighty thousand pesos each." On the other hand, the salaries of justices of
the Sandiganbayan are provided for in Presidential Decree 1606. The Constitution may sometimes
provide for the initial salary of a public officer and allow the legislature to change it later, subject to certain
limitations.
Thus, it is also provided in the Constitution that the salaries of the foregoing constitutional officers shall
be fixed by law and shall not be decreased during their tenure or continuance in office.
LIMITATIONS
The constitutional limitations on the power of the legislature to alter salaries are the following:
(1) The salaries of Senators and Members of the House of Representatives shall be
determined by law. No increase in said compensation shall take effect until after the expiration of the full
term of all the Members of the Senate and the House of Representives.
(2) As noted earlier, the salaries of the President and the Vice-President shall be
determined by law and the Vice-President shall not be decreased during their tenure. No increase in said
compensation shall take effect until after the expiration of the term of the incumbent during which such
increase was approved.
(3) The salary of the Chief Justice and of the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court,
nad of judges of lower courts shall be fixed by law. During their continuance in office, thier salary shall
not be decreased.
(4) The salary of the Chairman and the Commissioners of the Constitutional
Commissions shall be fixed by law and shall not be decreased during their tenure.
(5) The salaries of the Ombudsman and his Deputies, which shall be the same as those
provided for the Chairmen and Members, respectively, of the Constitutional Commissions, shall not be
decreased during their term of office.
In addition, the Constitution likewise provides that the Congress shall provide for the
standardization of compensation of government officals and employees, including those in government-
owned or controlled corporations with original charters taking into account the nature of the responsibilites
pertaining to, and the qualifications required for their positions. Moreover, it is likewise provided that no
elective or appointive public officer or employee shall recieve additional, double, or indirect compensation,
unless specifically authorized by law, nor accept without the consent of congress, any present,
emolument, officer, or title of any kind from any foreign government.
SALARY AND DUE PROCESS
RIGHT TO SALARY
The right to salary is based on the right to the office itself and accruse from the date of actual
commencement of the of actual commencement of the discharge of official duties. An appointment is
issued in accordance with pertinent laws and rules shall take effect immediately upon its issuance by the
appointing authority, and if the appointee has assumed the duties of the position, he shall be entitled to
recieve his salary at once, without awaiting the approval of his appointment by the Commission. It goes
without saying that a public official is not entitled to any compensation if he has not rendered any service.
It has been held that the ex officio position being actually and in legal contemplation part of the principal
office, it follows that the offical concerned has no right to receive additional compensation for his services
in said position.
Parenthetically, it is important to note that the Department of Budget and Management is vested
with the authority to review the salaries of government personnel.
In the case of the de jure officer who has been unlawfully prevented from assuming the office,
the salary accrues to him from the date of the deprivation of the office.
It has already been remarked that the de facto officer cannot himself benefit from his status and
so is not allowed as rule to collect salaries for services rendered. The exception is where he had acted in
good faith and there is no officer de jure claiming the office. Also, in the case of Rodriguez v. Tan,
discussed earlier, a de facto senator was allowed to retain the salaries collected by him prior to his ouster,
likewise on the jsutification of good faith. It should be remembered though that his decision was not
applied in the Monroy case for reasons already explained.
 In any event, the right of the de jure officer to his salary should be asserted agaisnt the de facto 3. Accomplishment of the purpose of the office
officer who had colleted it and not against the government continued paying the salary to the de facto
officer even after the adjudification of title in favor of the officer de jure. 4. Resignation

Back salaries are also payable to an officer illegally dismissed or otherwise unjustly deprived of 5. Abandonment
his office, the right to recover accruing from the date of deprivation.
6. Acceptance of an incompatible office
PROHIBITED DISPOSITION OF SALARY
7. Removal
Public policy prohibits the attachment, garnishment or assignment of the salary of a public officer
8. Recall
not only because such salary still belongs to the state as long as it has not yet been actually collected by
the public officer. "A rule, which has never been seriously questioned, is that money in the hands of public 9. Impeachment
officers, although it may be due government employees, is not liable to the creditors of these employees
in the process of garnishment." In Tiro v. Hontanosas, the Supreme Court ruled that the "salary check of 10. Forfeiture
a government officer or employee such as a teacher does not belong to him before it is physically
11. Abolition of the office and death
delivered to him. Until that time, the check belongs to the government. Accordingly, before there is actual
delivery of the check, the payee has no power over it; he cannot assign it without the consent of the 1. EXPIRATION OF THE TERM
government."
Term
From the practical viewpoint, the more cogent reason is that these inhibitions would diminish the
interest of the public functionary in his work since he would have nothing to forward to as compensation - the period during which the individual has a right to the public office
for his services. Not surprisingly, his decreased interest will result in impaired efficiency, not to mention a
temptation to make up for lost income by corrupting his office. An equally predictable connsequence is - it is the definite period of time prescribed by law by which an officer may hold an office
outright abandonment of office, from which the functionary can no longer anyway hope to draw his salary.
It may be fixed by:
For the same reasons, a public officer is not legally bound by a pledge made by him while still a
a. Fixed at a definite number of years
candidate that, if elected, he will not collect his salary or will donate it back to the government or give it to
some other beneficiary. Such a pledge can be no more than a campaign ploy and is therefore not b. Contingent on an act or event; or
enforceable in a court of law. However, having collected the salary, he may thereafter comply with his
pre-election pledge without any legal inhibition because such salary has become his private property c. Determined in the discretion of the superior authority.
which he may dispose of freely. Similarly, it has been ruled that a public officer cannot agree to render
services for less than the compensation provided for by the law, as this would be against public policy. Term vs. Right

Chapter 9 There is a difference between the term of office and the right to hold an office.

TERMINATION OF OFFICIAL RELATIONS A term of office is the period during which an elected officer or appointee is entitled to hold
office, perform its function and enjoy its privilege and emolument.
In a Republican System:
A right to hold a public office is the just and legal claim to hold and enjoy the powers and
The public office is not supposed to be held in perpetuity and relinquished only upon the death responsibilities of the office.
of the incumbent
Although Section 9, Art. XVII of the New Constitution made the term of the petitioners indefinite, it
It is also not inheritable, as in monarchies or some present-day dictatorships did not foreclose any challenge by the herein petitioners, in an election protest, of the "right" of
the private respondents to continue holding their respective offices. What has been directly
One of its features is the periodic renovation of the public service, usually effected through affected by said constitutional provision is the "term", not the "right" to the office, although the
replacement of the incumbent after the expiration its term "right" of an incumbent to an office which he is legally holding is co-extensive with the "term"
thereof.
Modes of terminating official relations:
Term vs Tenure
1. Expiration of the term
Tenure- represents the actual period of incumbency of the public officer.
2. Reaching the age limit (Retirement)
Example: If the President is removed after 2 years from assuming office, his term will remain fixed at 6 remove an officer is to oust him from office before the expiration of his term". Alajar merely lost the right
years but his tenure will have been for only 2years. to hold the office of Vice-Mayor of the City of Roxas by expiration of his term as such.

TERM TENURE Ingles vs. Mutuc: When such pleasure turns into displeasure, the incumbent is not "removed" or
"dismissed" from office his "term" merely "expires," in much the same way as an officer, whose right
It means the time during which the It represents the term during which the thereto ceases upon expiration of the fixed term for which he had been appointed or elected, is not and
officer may claim to hold the office as incumbent actually folds the office. cannot be deemed "removed" or "dismissed" therefrom, upon the expiration of said term. The main
of right, and fixes the interval after difference between the former the primarily confidential officer and the latter is that the latter's term
which the several incumbents shall It may be shorter than the term for is fixed or definite, whereas that of the former is not pre-fixed, but indefinite, at the time of his appointment
succeed on another reasons within or beyond the power of the or election, and becomes fixed and determined when the appointing power expresses its decision to put
incumbent an end to the services of the incumbent. When this event takes place, the latter is not
"removed" or "dismissed" from office his term has merely "expired".

There is no principle, law or doctrine by which the term of an office may be extended by Take note that in an expiration of term, there is no need for prior notice, due process or sufficient
reason of war. grounds before the incumbent can be separated from office.

Where the term is fixed by the Constitution, the same may not be changed by mere statute.
Some statute allows the incumbent to hold over even after the expiration of the fixed term of
office until the successor shall have been duly elected or appointed and qualified. In this case,
the officer holding over is considered de jure.
The concept of hold-over, when applied to a public officer, implies that:
The law usually indicated the time for the commencement of the term. If the law is silent in this
regard, the rule is that the term commences on the date of appointment or election, as the case
may be.
If an accidental vacancy occurs in an office where the beginning and the end of the term are
specified, the replacement shall serve only for the unexpired portion of the term of the
predecessor.

1. the office has a fixed term; and Where only the period of term is specified and the incumbent vacates his office before the
end of that period, his successor shall commence his own term for the full period unless
2. the incumbent is holding on to the succeeding term otherwise provided by law
The purpose of hold-over is:

- to prevent a hiatus in public office to the detriment of the people themselves, it is believed by 2. RESIGNATION
some courts that the incumbent has not only the right but also the duty to hold over pending his
lawful replacement, in the absence of an express or implied prohibition. Resignation- is a formal method of renunciation coupled with the physical act of relinquishment
of the office, and subject to approval by the superior authorities that the incumbent should
It has been likewise ruled that the Congress may not, by law deferring an election, reduce the observe.
three-year term of office of elective officials, as fixed in the Constitution.
Estrada vs. Desierto: Resignation is not a high level legal abstraction. It is a factual question and
In the case of judges, their term automatically ends upon their attainment of the retirement age its elements are beyond quibble:
of 70. (Art. VIII Sec. 11 1987 Constitution
1. there must be an intent to resign; and
Alajar vs. Alba:
2. the intent must be coupled by acts of relinquishment
Facts: the petitioner was appointed vice-mayor of Roxas City under the charter thereof providing that he
shall serve at the pleasure of the President. After serving for one year, he was asked by the Office of The validity of a resignation is not governed by any formal requirement as to form. It can be oral. It can
the President to vacate the position in favour of a new appointee. He objected, arguing that he was being be written. It can be express. It can be implied. As long as the resignation is clear, it must be given legal
removed without case in violation of his constitutional security of tenure, no charges having been filed or effect.
proved against him.

Held: The SC rejected his contention, holding that this was not a case of invalid removal but a mere
expiration of his term, the duration of which had been left for the President to determine. The petitioners While not indispensably required, resignation is usually made in writing, addressed to the
right to office had ceased because his term had expired. Alajar was not removed from office, for "to authority empowered to accept it. Unless this formality is followed and the resignation is
 approved, the public officer wil run the risk of prosecution for abandonment of his office, which,
to repeat, he may not simply surrender
Effectivity:
Joson vs. Nario: The decided weight of authority is that "apart from legal provision, xxx mere
presentation of resignation does not work a vacancy, and a resignation is not complete
until accepted by proper authority;" "xxx and until acceptance by proper authority the tender
or offer to resign is revocable," unless other-wise provided by statute." This is not to say that a
public officer may not resign. Mechem says that he "'may certainly resign, but without
acceptance his resignation is nothing, and he remains in office.' He is, therefore, so far as
the rights of third persons are concerned, not only still clothed with authority, but is subject to the
burdens of the office, and he may be compelled to perform the duties, and is liable for their non-
performance, as before."
Unless accepted, the resignation will not become effective. This acceptance is usually made in
writing, but it may thealso be implied, as where the approving authority gives due course to the
officers request for commutation of his accrued terminal leave or appoints his successor.
A resignation becomes effective usually on the date specified in the tender. If no such date is
specified, then it will become effective when the officer receives notice of the acceptance thereof
not on the date of the letter or notice of acceptance.
Withdrawal
The resignation may be withdrawn as long as it has not yet been accepted, or if it was tendered
as a result of mistake, threat, or any vice of consent.
A courtesy resignation according to the SC, cannot properly be interpreted as a resignation in
the legal sense for it is not necessarily a reflection of a public officials intention to surrender his
position. Rather, it manifests his submission to the will of the political authority and the appointing
power.
Where a person has tendered his resignation subject to the result of his appeal to the Civil
Service Board of Appeals, and to the provisions of the Cabinet on July 17, 1957, there was no
resignation to speak of that could be validly accepted.
To whom submitted
The law will usually specific the officer to whom the resignation should be submitted, but if it
does not, the rule is that it should be tendered to the officer who has the power to fill the
vacancy to be created, either by appointment or by calling a special election.
3. ABANDONMENT
Abandonment
- is the total surrender, relinquishment, disclaimer or cession of the public office and includes the intention
as well as the external act by which it is carried out
- it also connotes the giving up of the office but is not attended with the formalities observed in resignation
Essential elements of abandonment:
1. An intention to abandon
2. An overt act or external act by which the intention is carried into effect
Non-user refers to a neglect to use a right or privilege or to exercise an office. However, non-
performance of the duties of on office does not constitute abandonment where such non-
performance results from temporary disability or involuntary failure to perform.
Abandonment may also result from an acquiescence by the officer in his wrongful removal or
discharge.
Example: after a summary removal, an unreasonable delay by an officer illegally removed in taking steps
to vindicate his rights may constitute an abandonment of the office.
Abandonment may be effected by a positive act or can be the result of an omission, whether
deliberate or not.
Example: where the public officer simply stops reporting for work and refuses to continue discharging his
duties.
Zandueta vs. De la Cost: When a public official voluntarily accepts an appointment to an office newly
created or reorganized by law, which new office is incompatible with the one formerly occupied by him
, qualifies for the discharge of the functions thereof by taking the necessary oath, and enters into the
performance of his duties by executing acts inherent in said newly created or reorganized office and
receiving the corresponding salary, he will be considered to have abandoned the office he was
occupying by virtue of his former appointment, and he cannot question the constitutionality of the law
by virtue of which he was last appointed. He is excepted from said rule only when his non-acceptance of
the new appointment may affect public interest or when he is compelled to accept it by reason of legal
exigencies.
Acquiescence to ones removal, even if invalid, may result in abandonment of the office. Under
the Rules of Court, a person unlawfully deprived of his office by another may file a petition for
quo warranto within one year from the date of accrual of the cause of action. Failure to observe
this reglementary period, which is not suspended by the pendency of an administrative
remedy, will result as an abandonment of his right to recover his position because, as the SC
put it, it is not proper that the title of a public office be subjected to continued uncertainty.
This one-year prescriptive period does not apply to a petition for mandamus to compel
reinstatement of the ousted officer or employee. This petition may be filed even after one year
as long as the delay is not so unreasonable as to constitute laches.
QUO WARRANTO MANDAMUS
filed when a person is filed to compel reinstatement
unlawfully deprived of his of the ousted officer or
office by another employee
Prescription: 1 year No prescription
Failure to observe this May be filed even after one
reglementary period will year as long as the delay is
result as an abandonment of not so unreasonable as to
his right to recover his constitute laches
position
If an employee was illegally dismissed, he may, by his inaction or by sleeping on his right, in law,
be considered as having abandoned the office to which he was entitled to be reinstated. A person
illegally dismissed from the office is not thereby exonerated from the obligation to take steps for
his own protection and may not, for an unreasonable length of time, acquiesce to the order of
removal and then seek for his reinstatement. In case of unreasonable delay, he may be held to
have abandoned title to the office and any right to recover its emoluments. There must be
stability in the service so that public positions may not be unduly retarded; delays in the
enforcement of a right to positions in the service must be discouraged.
Security of tenure means that no officer or employee in the Civil Service shall be suspended or
dismissed except for cause as provided by law and after due process. Together with the merit
and fitness rule, it is a basic feature of the civil service system. Acceptance of a temporary
appointment where there was no intention to abandon a permanent position does not divest the
employee of security of tenure.
4. ACCEPTANCE OF AN INCOMPATIBLE OFFICE
Where two offices are incompatible, they cannot be held simultaneously by the same person.
Public policy requires that they vested in different individuals lest a hostility or, worse, conspiracy
of powers in the two offices result in irremediable detriment to the people.
Incompatibility exists when the character or nature of offices or relation to each other are such
that one person should not hold both because of the contrariety and antagonism which would
result in the attempt by one person to faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of one, toward
the incumbent of the other.
The rule is that acceptance of the incompatible office automatically vacates the first, and this is
true even if title to the second office should subsequently be annulled.
Having vacated the first office, he cannot recover it later if i=his title fails in the second office, as
where he is ousted therefrom in an election protest.
In re Querubin involved the question of whether or not the midnight appointees of President
Garcia who qualified for new and incompatible offices while incumbent in other positions could
return to their original posts after the revocation of their appointments by his successor,
President Macapagal. The SC held they could, as there was no effective holding of the office
to which they had been appointed. The Court pointed out that Garcias appointments were issued
shortly before midnight of Dec.29, 1961, and that the three succeeding days were all holidays.
The first working day of the new year was January 2, and, on that day, Administrative
Order No.2 revoking all the midnight appointments of the former President had already
been issued by President Macapagal. The midnight appointees were thus prevented from
entering into the discharge of the duties of the new offices, i.e., from effectively holding the said
offices, and so could return to their original positions.
Under Section 13 of Article VI of the Constitution, a Senator or Member of the House of
Representatives shall forfeit his seat the moment he holds another office or employment in the
Government, or any subdivision, agency or instrument thereof, including GOCCs or their
subsidiaries.
It has also been held that where an officer cannot resign without the approval of higher authority,
he may not circumvent the requirement by accepting an incompatible office, as otherwise he will
be allowed to do indirectly what he cannot do directly. In this case, it is the first and not the
second office that will be retained.
In the case of forbidden office, that is, an appointive office created or improved while the
prospective appointee thereto was a member of the legislature, it is the appointment itself during
his term of office that is prohibited. Hence, his holding of the second office is absolutely void and
he will not as a consequence forfeit his position in the legislature.
5. REMOVAL
Removal- the forcible and permanent separation of the incumbent from office before the
expiration of his term
Removal vs. Suspension
- Removal is different from suspension which is the temporary divestiture of the right to the office
during part of the term and does not have the effect of vacating the office.
Removal vs. Expiration
- Removal is distinguished from expiration of the term in that the latter mode operates
automatically to terminate official relations by the mere lapse of time conformably to law or the
pleasure of higher authority.
Where not expressly provided for, the power of removal may be derived under the doctrine of
implication from the power of appointment. In other words, the express power to appoint carries
with it the implied power to remove.
GR: all officers appointed by the President are also removable by him
EXPN:
member of the SC and of the Constitutional Commissions and the Ombudsman, although
appointed by the President, may be removed only through impeachment
judges of inferior courts also appointed by the President may only be removed by the SC
With respect to other functionaries, the rule is that they may not be suspended or dismissed
except for cause as provided by law and established at appropriate administrative proceedings,
and after due process
It has been ruled that demotions and transfers without cause are tantamount to removal.
Demotion in office by assigning an employee to a lower position in the same service, which has
a lower rate of compensation, is tantamount to removal if no cause is shown for it or if it is not
part of any disciplinary action.
 A member of the legislature may be suspended or expelled for disorderly behaviour by not less - a method of national inquest into the contract of public men
than 2/3 of all its members, provided that if the penalty imposed is suspension, the same shall
not exceed 60 days. - it is an extraordinary means of removal exercised by the legislature over a selected number of
officials, the purpose being to ensure the highest care in their indictment and conviction and the
Where the local official is re-elected pending the investigation of administrative charges allegedly imposition of special penalties in case of a finding of guilt, taking into account the degree or
committed by him during the preceding term, the investigation is deemed abated. However, this nature of the offense committed and the high status of the wrongdoers
is true only of the administrative charges and will not prevent his prosecution in court during his
subsequent term if such offenses also constitutes a crime. The reason is the electorate is not Impeachable officers:
vested with the pardoning power and cannot extinguish his criminal liability by merely re-electing
1. President
him.
2. Vice-President
Under Article IX 9B, Section 2(3) of the Constitution, no officer or employee in the Civil Service
shall be removed or suspended except for cause provided by law. 3. Members of the SC
The SC has defined the concept of for cause in the case of De los Santos vs. Mallare: it means for 4. Members of the Constitutional Commissions
reasons which the law and sound public policy recognized as sufficient warrant for removal, that is, legal
cause, and not merely causes which the appointing power in the exercise of discretion may deem 5. Ombudsman
sufficient. It is implied that officers may not be removed at the mere will of those vested with the power
**it would not be competent for the legislature to add or to or delete from this exclusive list
of removal, or without any cause. Moreover, the cause must relate to and affect the administration of the
office, and must be restricted to something of a substantial nature directly affecting the rights and interests Grounds for impeachment:
of the public."
1. Culpable violation of the Constitution
Concerning transfers, the SC declared that for the good of the service and whenever the public
interest demands, public officers may be temporarily assigned or detailed to other duties even 2. Treason
over his objection without necessarily violating his security of tenure. But this cannot be done if
the transfer is with a view to his removal or is resorted to as a scheme to lure him from his 3. Bribery
permanent position.
4. Other high crimes
Maturan vs. Maglana: Petitioner did not dispute that at the time he was appointed member of the Police
5. Graft and corruption
Force of San Francisco, Southern Leyte, he had neither qualified in an appropriate examination for the
position of policeman nor was he possessed with any civil service eligibility for any position in the 6. Betrayal of public trust
government. Such lack of a civil service eligibility makes his appointment temporary and without a definite
term and is dependent entirely upon the pleasure of the appointing power. xxx Procedure:

The fact that petitioner subsequently obtained a testimonial eligibility on October 10, 1974 is of no
moment. At the time he received his appointment, as aforestated, petitioner had no eligibility. As
such what is required is a new appointment, not merely reinstatement. But even then, he cannot compel
the Mayor to reappoint him for the power to appoint is in essence discretionary and the appointing power
enjoys sufficient discretion to select and appoint employees on the basis of their fitness to perform the
duties and assume the responsibilities of the position filled.
When a regular government employee is illegally dismissed, his position does not become
vacant and the new appointment made in order to replace him is null and void ab initio.
A reorganization which results I the abolition or merger of positions is now acknowledged as a
valid cause for removal.
6. IMPEACHMENT
Impeachment:
The process begins at the House of Representatives, which has the exclusive power to initiate
all cases of impeachment. A verified complaint must be filed by either a Member of the House
of Representatives or by any citizen upon a resolution of endorsement by any Member thereof.
Once the verified complaint has been filed it shall be included in the Order of Business within
ten session days, and referred to the proper Committee within three session days thereafter.
The Committee, after hearing, and by a majority vote of all its Members, shall submit its report
to the House
within sixty session days from such referral, together with the corresponding resolution. The
resolution shall be calendared for consideration by the House within ten session days from
receipt thereof. In the committee hearings, a vote of at least one-third of all the Members of the
House shall be necessary either to affirm a favorable resolution with the Articles of Impeachment
of the Committee, or override its contrary resolution. The vote of each Member shall be recorded.
If however, the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at least one-third of all the
Members of the House, the same shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment, and trial by the Senate
shall forthwith proceed.
 No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within
a period of one year.
The Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment. When sitting
for the purpose, the Senators shall be an oath or affirmation. When the President of the
Philippines is on trial, the Chief Justice of the SC shall preside, but shall not vote. No person
shall be convicted without the concurrence of 2/3 of all the Members of the Senate.
Judgment:
Judgment shall not extend further than removal from office and disqualification to hold any
office under the Republic of the Philippines, but the party convicted shall nevertheless be
liable and subject to prosecution, trial, and punishment according to law.
A judgment of Congress in an impeachment proceeding is normally not subject to judicial
review because of the vesture in the Senate of the sole power to try and decide all cases of
impeachment.
Interpretation of the meaning of the different grounds for impeachment and assessment of
the evidence presented at the trail involve the exercise of wisdom or discretion and therefore
come under the category of political questions.
But the courts may annul the proceedings if there is a showing of a grave abuse of discretion
committed by the Congress or of non-compliance with the procedural requirements of the
Constitution.
The judgment of conviction in impeachment proceedings is also not subject to the pardoning
power of the President under Section 19 of Article VII of the Constitution.
7. FORFEITURE
Forfeiture- another mode of terminating official relation which operates to divest the incumbent
of title to his office as a result of a positive act, either culpable or innocent.
Perez vs. Provincial Baord: mere filing of a certificate of candidacy constitutes forfeiture of petitioners
right to the controverted office under Section 29 of the Election Code of 1978
Acceptance by a Senator or Member of the HoR of an incompatible office shall work a forfeiture
of his seat in the legislature. In other words, he ceases to be a legislator the moment he holds
another office or employment in the Government, or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality
thereof, including GOCCs or their subsidiaries.
8. RECALL
Recall:
- a method of removal employed directly by the people themselves through the exercise of their suffrages.
- it is intended to make the public official more responsive to popular will through constant awareness of
the power of the electorate to replace him even before the expiration of his term
The power of recall for loss of confidence shall be exercised by the registered voters of a local
government unit to which the local elective official subject to such recall belongs.
Mendoza vs. COMELEC: A winner who dislodges in a recall election an incumbent elective local official
merely serves the balance of the latters term of office; it is not a full three-year term. It also goes without
saying that an incumbent elective local official against whom a recall election is initiated and who
nevertheless wins in a recall election must be viewed as being a continuing term of office and not as a
break in reckoning his three consecutive terms
Lonzanida vs. COMELEC: involuntary severance from office for any length of time short of the full term
provided by law amounts to an interruption of continuity of service. Accordingly, a mayor who had
consecutively served for two terms as such and was elected but later ousted by the COMELE in an
election protest against him during his third term, resulting in a declaration of his office as vacant by
reason of a failure of elections, cannot be considered as having served said third term by reason of
involuntary relinquishment of office. He may therefore run for the same position in the election immediately
subsequent to his aforesaid ouster.
9. ABOLITION OF THE OFFICE
Except where the office was created by the constitution itself, it may be abolished by the same
legislature that brought it into existence.
Removal from office vs. Abolition of the office
The security of tenure is not a personal privilege of any particular judge; the right of a judge to his full
tenure is not dependent alone upon his good conduct, but also upon the contingency hat the legislature
may, for the public good, in establishing the courts, from time to time, consider his office unnecessary
and abolish it. Tenure of office presupposes the existence of the office. Petitioners were not removed
from office for a removal implies that the office extends after the ouster. In this case, nothing remained of
the office after its abolition.
De la Llana vs. Alba: Nothing is better settled in our law than that the abolition of an office within the
competence of a legitimate body if done in good faith suffers from no infirmity.
xxx
As well-settled as the rule that the abolition of an office does not amount to an illegal removal of its
incumbent is the principle that, in order to be valid, the abolition must be made in good faith.
As with the offices in the other branches of the government, so it is with the judiciary. The test remains
whether the abolition is in good faith. As that element is conspicuously present in the enactment of Batas
Pambansa Blg. 129, then the lack of merit of this petition becomes even more apparent.
xxx
Removal is, of course, to be distinguished from termination by virtue of the abolition of the office. There
can be no tenure to a non-existent office. After the abolition, there is in law no occupant. In case of
removal, there is an office with an occupant who would thereby lose his position. It is in that sense that
from the standpoint of strict law, the question of any impairment of security of tenure does not arise.
 RA 6656:

Sec.2 A valid cause for removal exists when, pursuant to a bona fide reorganization, a position
has been abolished or rendered redundant or there is a need to merge, divide, or consolidate
positions in order to meet the exigencies of the service, or other lawful causes allowed by the
Civil Service Law. The existence of any or some of the following circumstances may be
considered as evidence of bad faith in the removals made as a result of reorganization, giving
rise to a claim for reinstatement or reappointment by an aggrieved party:

(a) Where there is a significant increase in the number of positions in the new staffing pattern of the
department or agency concerned;

(b) Where an office is abolished and other performing substantially the same functions is created;

(c) Where incumbents are replaced by those less qualified in terms of status of appointment, performance
and merit;

(d) Where there is a reclassification of offices in the department or agency concerned and the reclassified
offices perform substantially the same function as the original offices;

(e) Where the removal violates the order of separation provided in Section 3 hereof.

Officers and employees holding permanent appointments shall be given preferences for
appointment to the new positions in the approved staffing pattern comparable to their former
position or in case there are not enough comparable positions, to positions next lower in rank.

Sec. 5 provides that officers and employees holding permanent appointments shall be given
preference for appointment in other agencies if they meet the qualification requirements of the
positions therein.

10. DEATH

Death terminates the incumbents right to the office as it terminates everything else. However,
whenever the office will be immobilized as a result will depend on the nature of the office and
provisions for automatic succession.

While the general rule is that a public officers death or other permanent disability creates a
vacancy in the office, so that the successor is entitled to hold for a full term, such rule is
recognized to suffer exception in those cases where the clear intention I to have vacancies
appointments at regular intervals.

Malanyaon vs. Lising: the death of a public officer, charged with a violation of a penal law and suspended
as a consequence thereof pending resolution of his case, results merely in the dismissal of said case and
not in his acquittal. Accordingly, his heirs will not be entitled to his salaries corresponding to the period of
his suspension.

Loyao vs. Caube: the death or retirement of any judicial officer from the service does not preclude the
finding of any administrative liability to which he shall still be answerable.