In Re Appointments of Hon. Mateo A. Villanueva and Hon. Placido B.

Vallarta as
Judges of the Regional Trial Court of Branch 62, Bago City and Regional Trial
Court of Branch 24, Cabanatuan City respectively.
AM No. 98-5-01-SC November 9, 1998

Ponente: NARVISA, C.J

Facts: Referred to the court en banc, the appointment as judges of Hon. Mateo A. Villanueva for the
RTC of Branch 62, Bago City and of Hon. Placido B. Vallarta for the RTC of Branch 24, Cabanatuan City as
signed by the President under the date of March 30, 1998. The decision was based as prima facie by the
Chief Justice, implemented via Sec.4(1) Art. VII of the Constitution which implies that any vacancy shall
be filed within ninety days, and Sec.9 Art.VII which implies that the President shall appoint vacancy on
lower courts provided with the least of final three nominees by the Judicial and Bar Council for every
position, herein that the appointments made by the President shall be issued also within ninety days
from upon the submission of the list. The decision omitted the Sec. 15 Art. VII of the Constitution which
indicates that two months immediately prior to the next presidential elections and up to his term, the
President shall be prohibited on making appointments except temporary appointments to executive
positions when continued vacancies will prejudice public service and endanger public safety.

Issue: Does the ban imposed in Sec.15 Art. VII of the Constitution shall be implemented, in spite of the
requirement to fill the vacancies on the judiciary, as viewed on Sec. 4(1) and Sec.9 of Art VII of the
Constitution?

Ruling: Sec. 4 and Sec. 9 of Art VII are deemed as general provision however Sec.15 of Art. VII is a
particular provision which occurred only two months before election for the reason “not to tie the
hands of incoming President through midnight appointments” Sec. 4(1) and Sec 9. Art VII. directly mean
that the President can appoint positions in judiciary except to the timeframe of ban imposed by Sec. 15
Art. VII those two months immediately before the next presidential elections and up to his term, the
President is neither required to make appointments to the courts nor be allowed to do so. This
prohibition on appointment comes to effect once in every 6 years.

The appointment of Vallarta and Villanueva were clearly dated during the period of ban and
they assumed position within the operation of prohibition relating appointments. Straightforwardly,
there is no plausible reason to justify the making of the appointments despite filling vacancies for the
sake of public interest.
 The court declared the appointment as VOID and to forthwith CEASE AND DESIST from
discharging the judge offices to which they are appointed. Furthermore, they are considered by the
Judicial and Bar Council for re-nomination to the same positions.