Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Issue: Whether or not the JBCs action of having members from the houses of
the congress to be unconstitutional.
Facts: Judge Ferdinand Villanueva, after more than a year of being a first-
level judge applied for the vacant position of Presiding Judge in the RTCs but the JBC
disqualified the petitioner due to its five-year service policy. He filed a petition
stating that the policy of JBC of which the incumbent judge must serve his current
position for at least five years before his qualification as a second-level judge is
against the Constitution.
Issue: Whether or not the JBCs policy of requiring five years of service as
judges of first-level courts before qualifying as an applicant to second-level courts is
constitutional.
Held: The policy of Judicial and Bar Council is Constitutional because under
Article VIII Section 8 (5) of the Philippine Constitution The Council shall have the
principal function of recommending appointees to the Judiciary. It may exercise
such other functions and duties as the Supreme Court may assign to it. In this case,
the JBC has the authority to recommend appointees to the judiciary, only those
nominated by the JBC in a list officially transmitted to the President may be
appointed by the latter as justice or judge in the judiciary.
Case Number: 171
De la Llana vs. Alba GR Number: L-57883
Held: Yes, it is constitutional. The removal or the separation of the judges and
justices is not involved, what is involved is the validity of the abolition of the offices.
It is a well-known rule that valid abolition of offices is neither removal nor
separation of the incumbents. In this case, the removal is to be distinguished from
termination by virtue of valid abolition of the office. There can be no tenure to a
non-existent office. After the abolition, there is 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.
Case Number: 172
Nicos Industrial Court vs. CA, 206 SCRA 127