tnggal pubcorp

8/19/2019 tnggal pubcorp

1/75

IV. LOCAL OFFICIALSA. PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO ELECTIVE AND APPOINTIVE LOCAL OFFICIALS

PRACTICE OF PROFESSIONCases:

1. Republic of the Philippines v. Rambuyong (G.R. No. 16781! " #ctobe$ %1&

FACTS: 'lf$eo ). Chu (Chu& file a case fo$ collection of a sum of money an*o$ amagesagainst the National Po+e$ Co$po$ation (NPC& oc,ete as Civil Case No. -1/7 +hich+as $affle to the Regional 0$ial Cou$t (R0C& of -pil! amboanga 2ibugay! 3$anch %"4appea$ing as counsel fo$ Chu is 'tty. Richa$ 3. Rambuyong ('tty. Rambuyong& +ho+as then the incumbent 5iceayo$ of -pil! amboanga 2ibugay.

0he$eafte$! NPC file a otion fo$ -nhibition of 'tty. Rambuyong a$guing that une$ 2ection /(b&! (1& of Republic 'ct (R'& No. 716! othe$+ise ,no+n as the ocal

Gove$nment Coe! sanggunian membe$s a$e p$ohibite to appea$ as counsel befo$eany cou$t +he$ein 9 9 9 any office! agency o$ inst$umentality of the gove$nment is theave$se pa$ty. NPC contene that being a gove$nmento+ne o$ cont$olleco$po$ation! it is emb$ace +ithin the te$m! inst$umentality.

ISSUE:;hethe$ NPC is an inst$umentality of gove$nment such that 'tty. Rambuyong! as a2anggunian membe$! shoul not appea$ as counsel against it

HELD:2ection % of the 'minist$ative Coe of 1/87 is clea$ an unambiguous. -t catego$ically

p$ovies that the te$m inst$umentality inclues gove$nmento+ne o$ cont$olleco$po$ations.


2/75

%. Catu v. Rellosa ('.C. No. =7>8! 1/ ?eb$ua$y %8&

FACTS: Complainant ;ilf$eo Catu is a coo+ne$ of a lot an builing e$ecte at alate! anila.;ith his mothe$ an b$othe$! conteste the possession of @liAabeth Catu an 'ntonio

Pasto$ of one of the units in the builing. 0he latte$ igno$e emans to vacate thep$emises. 0hus! a complaint +as initiate against them in the upong 0agapamayapa inthei$ ba$angay.

Responent 'tty 5icente Rellosa! as Punong 3a$angay summone the pa$ties toconciliation meetings. 3ut the pa$ties faile to a$$ive at an amicable settlement! thus!$esponent issue a ce$tification fo$ the filing of the app$op$iate action in cou$t.0he$eafte$! CatuBs mothe$ an b$othe$ file a complaint fo$ eectment against @liAabethan Pasto$ in the 0C. Responent ente$e his appea$ance as counsel fo$ theefenants in that case. 3ecause of this! complainant file the instant aminist$ativecomplaint. 0he complaint +as $efe$$e to the -3P fo$ investigation. -3P foun sufficient

g$oun to iscipline $esponent.

'cco$ing to -3P! Responent amitte that as punong ba$angay he p$esie ove$ theconciliation p$oceeing! ho+eve$! he $ep$esente the efenants in the eectment casefile against them! an by oing so he violate Rule 6.> of the Coe of P$ofessionalResponsibility. ?u$the$mo$e! as an elective official! he cont$avene the p$ohibition une$ 2ection 7 (b&(%& of R.'. 671> ( 0he Coe of Conuct an @thical 2tana$s fo$ Public#fficials an @mployees&.

"Sec. 7 Prohibited Acts and Transactions- In addition to acts and omissions of public officials and employees now prescribed in the Constitution and existin laws! thefollowin shall constitute prohibited acts and transactions of any public officials and employee and are hereby declared to be unlawful ### ### ### $b% &utside employment and other acti'ities related thereto.- Public officials and employees durin their incumbency shall not

### ### ### $(% )nae in the pri'ate practice of profession unless authori*ed by the Constitution or law! pro'ided that such practice will not conflict or tend to conflict with their official functions+ ###" 0he -3P $ecommene the $esponentBs suspension f$om the p$actice of la+ fo$ onemonth +ith ste$n +a$ning that the commission of the same o$ simila$ act +ill be ealt+ith mo$e seve$ely. 0his +as aopte by the -3P 3oa$ of Gove$no$s.

ISSUE:;#N the $esponent can $ep$esent the efenant in the eectment case +hile he is anincumbent public official.

2


3/75

HELD: 0he 2C $ule that $esponent cannot be foun liable fo$ violation of $ule 6.> of theCoe of P$ofessional Responsibility. 's +o$e! that Rule applies only to a la+ye$ +hohas left gove$nment se$vice an in connection D+ith any matte$ in +hich he inte$vene

+hile in sai se$viceD. Responent +as an incumbent punong ba$angay at the time hecommitte the act complaine of. 0he$efo$e! he +as not cove$e by that p$ovision.

0he 2C also $ule that 2ection 7(b&(%& of R.' 671> is a gene$al la+ +hich applies to allpublic officials an employees. 0hus! it is not applicable to the case at ba$. . 'cco$ingly! the$esponent as punong ba$angay +as not fo$bien to p$actice his p$ofession.


4/75

PROHIBITION AGAINST APPOINTMENT>. ?lo$es v. E$ilon (G.R. No. 1"7>%! %%Hune 1//>&

FACTS:

0he constitutionality of 2ec. 1>! pa$. (&! of R.'. 7%%7!

othe$+ise ,no+n as the D3asesConve$sion an Eevelopment 'ct of 1//%!D une$ +hich $esponent ayo$ Richa$ H.Go$on of #longapo City +as appointe Chai$man an Chief @9ecutive #ffice$ of the2ubic 3ay et$opolitan 'utho$ity (23'&! is challenge +ith p$aye$ fo$ p$ohibition!p$elimina$y inunction an tempo$a$y $est$aining o$e$. Pa$ag$aph (& $eas I

(& Chairman administrator I 0he P$esient shall appoint a p$ofessional manage$ asaminist$ato$ of the 2ubic 'utho$ity +ith a compensation to be ete$mine by the 3oa$subect to the app$oval of the 2ec$eta$y of 3uget! +ho shall be the ex oficio chai$manof the 3oa$ an +ho shall se$ve as the chief e9ecutive office$ of the 2ubic 'utho$ity:Pro'ided! howe'er! That for the first year of its operations from the effecti'ity of this Act!

the mayor of the City of &lonapo shall be appointed as the chairman and chief executi'e officer of the Subic Authority .

Petitione$s maintain that such inf$inges to the constitutional p$ovision of 2ec. 7! fi$st pa$.! '$t. -3! of the Constitution! +hich states that Dno elective official shall be eligible fo$ appointment o$ esignation in any capacity to any public office$ o$ position u$ing histenu$e!D 0he petitione$s also conten that Cong$ess enc$oaches upon the isc$etiona$ypo+e$ of the P$esient to appoint.

ISSUE: ;hethe$ o$ not the pro'iso in 2ec. 1>! pa$. (&! of R.'. 7%%7 is constitutional.

HELD:0he p$oviso violates the constitutional p$osc$iption against appointment o$ esignationof elective officials to othe$ gove$nment posts.

-n full! 2ec. 7 of '$t. -3 of the Constitution p$ovies:

,o electi'e official shall be eliible for appointment or desination in any capacity to any public office or position durin his tenure.nless otherwise allowed by law or by the primary functions of his position! noappointi'e official shall hold any other office or employment in the o'ernment or any subdi'ision! aency or instrumentality thereof! includin o'ernment-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries.

-n the case at ba$! the subect pro'iso i$ects the P$esient to appoint an electiveofficial! i.e.! the ayo$ of #longapo City! to othe$ gove$nment posts (as Chai$man of the3oa$ an Chief @9ecutive #ffice$ of 23'&. 2ince this is p$ecisely +hat the

4


5/75

constitutional p$osc$iption see,s to p$event! the$e is no oubt to conclue that the pro'iso cont$avenes 2ec. 7! fi$st pa$.! '$t. -3! of the Constitution.

The appointment of ordon as Chairman of the S/0A is null. 1owe'er! despite hisappointment to the said office! ordon did not automatically forfeit his seat as 0ayor of

&lonapo City.

0hus! $esponent Go$on $emains ayo$ of #longapo City! an his acts as 23'official a$e not necessa$ily null an voi4 he may be consie$e a de facto office$ +homay $etain the benefits he may $eceive f$om the position he may have assume.

5


6/75


7/75

accesso$y penalty of pe$petual absolute isFualification an in tu$n! pu$suant to '$ticle> of the RPC! isFualifie him to $un fo$ elective office.

2ection " (a& of the GC +oul not apply to cases +he$ein a penal p$ovision such as '$ticle "1 in this case i$ectly an specifically p$ohibits the convict f$om $unning fo$

elective office.


8/75

=. Halosos v. Comelec (G.R. No. %=>>! 18 Hune %1>&

FACTS:Rommel Halosos +as bo$n in JueAon City on #ctobe$ %6! 1/7>. =! he ecie to $etu$n to the Philippines an live +ithhis b$othe$ in -pil! amboanga 2ibugay. ?ou$ ays upon his $etu$n! he too, an oath ofallegiance to the Republic of the Philippines! hence! he +as issue a Ce$tificate ofReacFuisition of Philippine CitiAenship by the 3u$eau of -mmig$ation. #n 2eptembe$ 1!%/ he $enounce his 'ust$alian citiAenship! e9ecuting a s+o$n $enunciation of thesame in compliance +ith Republic 'ct (R.'.& /%%=. ?$om the time of his $etu$n! HalososacFui$e a $esiential p$ope$ty in the same village +he$e he live.


9/75

6. '$atea v. Comelec (G.R. No. 1/=%%/! / #ctobe$ %1%&

FACTS: Romeo E. onAania (onAania& an @stela E. 'ntipolo ('ntipolo& +e$e caniates fo$

ayo$ of 2an 'ntonio! ambales in the ay %1 National an ocal @lections. E$a.2ig$i 2. Roolfo (Roolfo& file a petition une$ 2ection 78 of the #mnibus @lectionCoe to isFualify onAania an to eny ue cou$se o$ to cancel onAaniaKsce$tificate of caniacy on the g$oun that onAania +as electe! an ha se$ve! asmayo$ of 2an 'ntonio! ambales fo$ fou$ ("& consecutive te$ms immeiately p$io$ to thete$m fo$ the ay %1 elections. Roolfo asse$te that onAania mae a false mate$ial $ep$esentation in his ce$tificateof caniacy +hen onAania ce$tifie une$ oath that he +as eligible fo$ the office hesought election. 2ection 8! '$ticle of the 1/87 Constitution an 2ection ">(b& of theocal Gove$nment Coe both p$ohibit a local elective official f$om being electe anse$ving fo$ mo$e than th$ee consecutive te$ms fo$ the same position.

0he C#@@C 2econ Eivision $ene$e a Resolutionon 18 ?eb$ua$y %1 cancellingonAaniaKs ce$tificate of caniacy.

onAaniaKs motion fo$ $econsie$ation befo$e the C#@@C @n 3anc $emainepening u$ing the ay %1 elections. onAania an @f$en Racel '$atea ('$atea&ga$ne$e the highest numbe$ of votes an +e$e $espectively p$oclaime ayo$ an5iceayo$.

'$atea too, his oath of office as 'cting ayo$ befo$e Regional 0$ial Cou$t (R0C& Hugeof #longapo. #n the same ate! '$atea +$ote the E-G an $eFueste fo$ an opinion on

+hethe$! as 5iceayo$! he +as legally $eFui$e to assume the #ffice of the ayo$ invie+ of onAaniaKs isFualification.E-G state that onAania +as isFualifie to hol office by $eason of his c$iminalconviction! an as a conseFuence! his office +as eeme pe$manently vacant! anthus! '$atea shoul assume the #ffice of the ayo$ in an acting capacity +ithoutp$euice to the C#@@CKs $esolution of onAaniaKs motion fo$ $econsie$ation.

-n anothe$ lette$ ate 6 'ugust %1! '$atea $eFueste the E-G to allo+ him to ta,ethe oath of office as ayo$ of 2an 'ntonio! ambales. -n his $esponse! then 2ec$eta$yHesse . Rob$eo allo+e '$atea to ta,e an oath of office as Dthe pe$manent unicipalayo$ of 2an 'ntonio! ambales +ithout p$euice ho+eve$ to the outcome of the casespening befo$e the C#@@C.

#n 11 'ugust %1! the C#@@C @n 3anc issue a Resolution isFualifyingonAania f$om $unning fo$ ayo$ in the ay %1 elections. 0he C#@@C @n 3ancKs$esolution +as base on t+o g$ouns: first ! onAania ha been electe an ha se$veas ayo$ fo$ mo$e than th$ee consecutive te$ms +ithout inte$$uption4 an second !onAania ha been convicte by final ugment of 1 counts of falsification une$ theRevise Penal Coe. onAania +as sentence fo$ each count of falsification to

9


10/75

imp$isonment of " yea$s an 1 ay of prisi3n correccional as minimum! to 8 yea$s an 1ay of prisi3n mayor as ma9imum. 0he ugment of conviction became final on %>#ctobe$ %/ in the Eecision of this Cou$t in 4on*anida '. People! befo$e onAaniafile his ce$tificate of caniacy on 1 Eecembe$ %/.

0he manne$ of filling up the pe$manent vacancy in the #ffice of the ayo$ of 2an 'ntonio! ambales is epenent upon the ete$mination of onAaniaKs $emoval.;hethe$ onAania +as isFualifie une$ 2ection 68 of the #mnibus @lection Coe! o$ mae a false mate$ial $ep$esentation une$ 2ection 78 of the same Coe that resulte!" h!s #ert!$!#ate %$ #a"!a#& 'e!"( )%! ab initio! is ete$minative of +hethe$

'$atea o$ 'ntipolo is the $ightful occupant to the #ffice of the ayo$ of 2an 'ntonio!ambales.

HELD: 'ntipolo! the allege Dsecon place$!D shoul be p$oclaime ayo$ because onAaniaKsce$tificate of caniacy +as voi ab initio. -n sho$t! onAania +as neve$ a caniate at

all. 'll votes fo$ onAania +e$e st$ay votes. 0hus! 'ntipolo! the only Fualifiecaniate! actually ga$ne$e the highest numbe$ of votes fo$ the position of ayo$.

0he g$ouns fo$ isFualification fo$ a petition une$ 2ection 68 1 of the #mnibus @lectionCoe a$e specifically enume$ate.

' petition fo$ isFualification une$ 2ection 68 clea$ly $efe$s to Dthe commission of p$ohibite acts an possession of a pe$manent $esient status in a fo$eign count$y.D Allthe %$$e"ses *e"t!%"e !" Se#t!%" +, re$er t% ele#t!%" %$$e"ses u"er theO*"!'us Ele#t!%" C%e- "%t t% )!%lat!%"s %$ %ther e"al la/s. 0he$e is absolutelynothing in the language of 2ection 68 that +oul ustify incluing violation of the th$ee

te$m limit $ule! o$ conviction by final ugment of the c$ime of falsification une$ theRevise Penal Coe! as one of the g$ouns o$ offenses cove$e une$ 2ection 68.

#n the othe$ han! 2ection 78% of the #mnibus @lection Coe states that a ce$tificate of caniacy may be enie o$ cancelle +hen the$e is $alse *ater!al rerese"tat!%" %$ the #%"te"ts %$ the #ert!$!#ate %$ #a"!a#&:

1 2ec. 68. 2is5ualifications. 'ny caniate +ho! in an action o$ p$otest in +hich he is a pa$ty is ecla$e by final‒ecision by a competent cou$t guilty of! o$ foun by the Commission of having 0a1 (!)e" *%"e& %r %ther *ater!al#%"s!erat!%" t% !"$lue"#e- !"u#e %r #%rrut the )%ters %r u'l!# %$$!#!als er$%r*!"( ele#t%ral $u"#t!%"s2 0'1#%**!tte a#ts %$ terr%r!s* t% e"ha"#e h!s #a"!a#&2 0#1 se"t !" h!s ele#t!%" #a*a!(" a" a*%u"t !"e3#ess %$ that all%/e '& th!s C%e2 01 s%l!#!te- re#e!)e %r *ae a"& #%"tr!'ut!%" r%h!'!te u"er

Se#t!%"s ,4- 45- 4+- 46 a" 7892 0e1 )!%late a"& %$ Se#t!%"s ,8- ,- ,5- ,+ a" ;+7- ara(rahs - e-


11/75

2ection 7" of the #mnibus @lection Coe etails the #%"te"ts %$ the #ert!$!#ate %$ #a"!a#&:2ec. 7". Contents of certificate of candidacy. ‒ The #ert!$!#ate %$ #a"!a#& shallstate that the ers%" $!l!"( !t is announcing his caniacy fo$ the office state the$einan that he !s el!(!'le $%r sa! %$$!#e 9 9 9

0he conviction of onAania by final ugment! +ith the penalty of prisi3nmayor ! !s=ual!$!es h!* eretuall& $r%* h%l!"( a"& u'l!# %$$!#e- %r $r%* 'e!"(ele#te t% a"& u'l!# %$$!#e. Th!s eretual !s=ual!$!#at!%" t%%< e$$e#t u%" the$!"al!t& %$ the >u(*e"t %$ #%")!#t!%"- 'e$%re L%"?a"!a $!le h!s #ert!$!#ate %$ #a"!a#&.

0he penalty of prisi3n mayor automatically ca$$ies +ith it! by ope$ation of la+! theaccesso$y penalties of tempo$a$y absolute isFualification an eretual se#!al!s=ual!$!#at!%". Lne$ '$ticle > of the Revise Penal Coe! tempo$a$y absoluteisFualification p$ouces the effect of Dep$ivation of the $ight to vote in any election fo$ any popula$ elective office or to be elected to such office. 0he u$ation of tempo$a$y

absolute isFualification is the same as that of the p$incipal penalty of prisi3n mayor .

#n the othe$ han! une$ '$ticle >% of the Revise Penal Coe! eretual se#!al!s=ual!$!#at!%" means that Dthe %$$e"er shall "%t 'e er*!tte t% h%l a"& u'l!#%$$!#e ur!"( the er!% %$ h!s !s=ual!$!#at!%"- which is perpetually. 3othtempo$a$y absolute isFualification an pe$petual special isFualification constituteineligibilities to hol elective public office.A ers%" su$$er!"( $r%* these !"el!(!'!l!t!es !s !"el!(!'le t% ru" $%r ele#t!)e u'l!#%$$!#e- a" #%**!ts a $alse *ater!al rerese"tat!%" !$ he states !" h!s #ert!$!#ate %$ #a"!a#& that he !s el!(!'le t% s% ru".

E$$e#t %$ a V%! Cert!$!#ate %$ Ca"!a#& ' cancelle ce$tificate of caniacy voi ab initio cannot give $ise to a vali caniacy!an much less to vali votes.

's the Comelec state in thei$ ?eb$ua$y %11 Resolution: Since 4on*anida was ne'er acandidate for the position of 0ayor 6of San Antonio! 8ambales! the 'otes cast for himshould be considered stray 'otes. Conse5uently! Inter'enor Antipolo! who remains asthe sole 5ualified candidate for the mayoralty post and obtained the hihest number of 'otes! should now be proclaimed as the duly elected 0ayor of San Antonio! 8ambales.onAaniaBs ce$tificate of caniacy +as cancelle because he +as ineligible o$ notFualifie to $un fo$ ayo$.9:wphi9;hethe$ his ce$tificate of caniacy is cancellebefo$e o$ afte$ the elections is immate$ial because the cancellation on such g$ounmeans he +as neve$ a caniate f$om the ve$y beginning! his ce$tificate of caniacybeing voi ab initio. 0he$e +as only one Fualifie caniate fo$ ayo$ in the ay %1elections 'ntipolo! +ho the$efo$e $eceive the highest numbe$ of votes.Petition ismisse.

11


12/75


13/75

omicile (omicile of choice&. -n CoFuilla! the Cou$t al$eay ac,no+lege that fo$ aniniviual to acFui$e 'me$ican citiAenship! he must establish $esience in the L2'.2ince 0y himself amitte that he became a natu$aliAe 'me$ican citiAen! then he musthave necessa$ily abanone 3a$angay 6 as his omicile of o$igin4 an t$ansfe$$e to theL2'! as his omicile of choice.

0yKs $eacFuisition of his Philippine citiAenship une$ R' /%%= ha no automatic impacto$ effect on his $esience*omicile.


14/75

8. 2obeanaConon v. Comelec (G.R No. 1/87"%! 1 'ugust %1%&

FACTS:0he petitione$ is a natu$albo$n ?ilipino citiAen having been bo$n of ?ilipino pa$ents on

'ugust 8! 1/"". #n Eecembe$ 1>! 1/8"! she became a natu$aliAe 'ust$alian citiAen

o+ing to he$ ma$$iage to a ce$tain Mevin 0homas Conon.

#n Eecembe$ %! %=! she file an application to $eacFui$e Philippine citiAenshipbefo$e the Philippine @mbassy in Canbe$$a! 'ust$alia pu$suant to 2ection > of R.'. No./%%= othe$+ise ,no+n as the DCitiAenship Retention an Re'cFuisition 'ct of %>.D =

0he application +as app$ove an the petitione$ too, he$ oath of allegiance to theRepublic of the Philippines on Eecembe$ =! %=.

#n 2eptembe$ 18! %6! the petitione$ file an uns+o$n Eecla$ation of Renunciation of 'ust$alian CitiAenship befo$e the Eepa$tment of -mmig$ation an -nigenous 'ffai$s!Canbe$$a! 'ust$alia! +hich in tu$n issue the #$e$ ate 2eptembe$ %7! %6 ce$tifying

that she has cease to be an 'ust$alian citiAen.

0he petitione$ $an fo$ ayo$ in he$ hometo+n of Caba! a Lnion in the %7 elections.2he lost in he$ bi. 2he again sought elective office u$ing the ay 1! %1 electionsthis time fo$ the position of 5iceayo$. 2he obtaine the highest numbe$s of votes an+as p$oclaime as the +inning caniate. 2he too, he$ oath of office on ay 1>! %1.2oon the$eafte$! p$ivate $esponents Robelito 5. Pica$! ;ilma P. Pagauan7 an uis .3autista!8 (p$ivate $esponents& all $egiste$e vote$s of Caba! a Lnion! file sepa$atepetitions fo$ Fuo +a$$anto Fuestioning the petitione$Ks eligibility befo$e the R0C. 0hepetitions simila$ly sought the petitione$Ks isFualification f$om holing he$ elective poston the g$oun that she is a ual citiAen an that she faile to e9ecute a Dpe$sonal an

s+o$n $enunciation of any an all fo$eign citiAenship befo$e any public office$ autho$iAeto aministe$ an oathD as impose by 2ection =(%& of R.'. No. /%%=.0he petitione$ enie being a ual citiAen an ave$$e that since 2eptembe$ %7! %6!she cease to be an 'ust$alian citiAen. 2he claime that the Eecla$ation of Renunciation of 'ust$alian CitiAenship she e9ecute in 'ust$alia sufficiently complie+ith 2ection =(%&! R.'. No. /%%= an that he$ act of $unning fo$ public office is a clea$ abanonment of he$ 'ust$alian citiAenship.

ISSUE:?o$ pu$poses of ete$mining the petitione$Ks eligibility to $un fo$ public office! +hethe$ theDs+o$n $enunciation of fo$eign citiAenshipD in 2ection =(%& of R.'. No. /%%= is a me$ep$ofo$ma $eFui$ement.

HELD:R.'. No. /%%= allo+s the $etention an $eacFuisition of ?ilipino citiAenship fo$ natu$albo$n citiAens +ho have lost thei$ Philippine citiAenship18 by ta,ing an oath of allegianceto the Republic. 0he oath is an abb$eviate $epat$iation p$ocess that $esto$es oneKs?ilipino citiAenship an all civil an political $ights an obligations concomitant the$e+ith.-n opeA v. C#@@C!%1 +e ecla$e its catego$ical an single meaning: a ?ilipino

14


15/75

'me$ican o$ any ual citiAen cannot $un fo$ any elective public position in thePhilippines unless he o$ she pe$sonally s+ea$s to a $enunciation of all fo$eigncitiAenship at the time of filing the ce$tificate of caniacy. ;e also e9poune on thefo$m of the $enunciation an hel that to be vali! the $enunciation must be containe inan affiavit uly e9ecute befo$e an office$ of the la+ +ho is autho$iAe to aministe$ an

oath stating in clea$ an uneFuivocal te$ms that affiant is $enouncing all fo$eigncitiAenship.

;e fin no $eason to epa$t f$om the manato$y natu$e infuse by the above $ulings tothe ph$ase Ds+o$n $enunciationD. 0he language of the p$ovision is plain anunambiguous. -t e9p$esses a single! efinite! an sensible meaning an must thus be$ea lite$ally.%= 0he fo$eign citiAenship must be fo$mally $eecte th$ough an affiavit ulys+o$n befo$e an office$ autho$iAe to aministe$ oath.

'n oath is a solemn ecla$ation! accompanie by a s+ea$ing to Go o$ a $eve$epe$son o$ thing! that oneKs statement is t$ue o$ that one +ill be boun to a p$omise. 0he

pe$son ma,ing the oath implicitly invites punishment if the statement is unt$ue o$ thep$omise is b$o,en. 0he legal effect of an oath is to subect the pe$son to penalties fo$ pe$u$y if the testimony is false. 0o hol the oath to be a me$e p$o fo$ma $eFui$ement isto say that it is only fo$ ce$emonial pu$poses4 it +oul also accommoate a me$eFualifie o$ tempo$a$y allegiance f$om gove$nment office$s +hen the Constitution anthe legislatu$e clea$ly eman othe$+ise.

15


16/75

/. Co$oo$a v. Comelec (GR No. 176/"7! 1/ ?eb$ua$y %8&

FACTS:Co$o$a file a complaint affiavit befo$e Comelec la+ epa$tment against 0ambunting

asse$ting that Gustavo 0ambunting mae false asse$tion in his ce$tificate of caniacyby claiming that he is a Natu$al 3o$n ?ilipino an $esient befo$e the election in %1an %". Co$o$a state that 0ambunting +as not eligible to $un fo$ local public officebecause 0ambunting lac,e the $eFui$e citiAenship an $esiency $eFui$ements. 0oisp$ove 0ambuntings claim of being a natu$albo$n ?ilipino citiAen! Co$o$a p$esente ace$tification f$om the 3u$eau of -mmig$ation +hich state that! in t+o instances!0ambunting claime that he is an 'me$ican: upon a$$ival in the Philippines on 16Eecembe$ % an upon epa$tu$e f$om the Philippines on 17 Hune %1. 'cco$ing toCo$o$a! these t$avel ates confi$me that 0ambunting acFui$e 'me$ican citiAenshipth$ough natu$aliAation in .

0ambunting fu$the$ state that he has $esie in the Philippines since bi$th. 0ambuntinghas imbibe the ?ilipino cultu$e! has spo,en the ?ilipino language! an has beeneucate in ?ilipino schools. 0ambunting maintaine that p$oof of his loyalty anevotion to the Philippines +as sho+n by his se$vice as councilo$ of Pa$aaFue.

0o $efute Co$o$as claim that the numbe$ of yea$s of $esiency state in 0ambuntingsce$tificates of caniacy is false because 0ambunting lost his $esiency because of hisnatu$aliAation as an 'me$ican citiAen! 0ambunting contene that the $esiency$eFui$ement is not the same as citiAenship.

ISSUE:;hat is the basis of isFualification ual citiAenship o$ ual allegiance

HELD:0ambunting possesses ual citiAenship. 3ecause of the ci$cumstances of his bi$th! it+as no longe$ necessa$y fo$ 0ambunting to une$go the natu$aliAation p$ocess toacFui$e 'me$ican citiAenship. 0he p$ocess involve in -N2 ?o$m -1> only se$ve toconfi$m the 'me$ican citiAenship +hich 0ambunting acFui$e at bi$th. 0he ce$tificationf$om the 3u$eau of -mmig$ation +hich Co$o$a p$esente containe t+o t$ips +he$e

16


17/75

0ambunting claime that he is an 'me$ican.


18/75

MANNER AND DATE OF ELECTION1.Mia v. 2enate of the Philippines (sup$a&

FACTS:R' 67>" p$ovie fo$ the o$ganic act manate by the constitution fo$ the fo$mation of

'R. Lnfo$tunately sai o$ganic act i not p$ovie fo$ the e9act ate fo$ the $egionalelections in 'R. 3ecause of this! seve$al a+s +e$e enacte to p$ovie fo$ the ateof the election 4 R' /=" 2econ onay of 2eptembe$ %1! R' /1"INovembe$ %6! %1! R' />>>I%n onay of 'ugust %=. 'n on the same ate eve$y th$eeyea$s the$eafte$.

Pu$suant to R' />>>! C#@@C mae p$epa$ations fo$ 'ugust 8! %1 @lection butsometime in Hune! Cong$ess enacte R' 11=> 'n act p$oviing fo$ thesynch$oniAation of the elections in 'R +ith the national an local elections.

2eve$al people! incluing he$ein plaintiff assaile the constitutionality of the sai

enactment.

ISSUE@S:1. ;#N 'R is a istinct f$om an o$ina$y local gove$nment unit an the$efo$eshoul not be $eFui$e to hol its election u$ing the local elections manate in theconstitution.

%. ;#N R'. 11=> is constitutional on the basis that it g$ante the p$esient thepo+e$ to appoint #-C fo$ seve$al elective positions until such positions be fille u$ingthe ay %1> elections.

HELD:1. No 'R is not a istinct gove$nment unit the$efo$e not e9empt f$om thesynch$oniAation of election. 2C hel that the inclusion of autonomous $egions in theenume$ation of political subivisions of the 2tate une$ the heaing ocal Gove$nmentinicates Fuite clea$ly the constitutional intent to consie$ autonomous $egions as one of the fo$ms of local gove$nments.

0hat the Constitution mentions only the national gove$nment an the localgove$nments! an oes not ma,e a istinction bet+een the local gove$nment an the$egional gove$nment! is pa$ticula$ly $evealing! bet$aying as it oes the intention of thef$ame$s of the Constitution to consie$ the autonomous $egions not as sepa$ate fo$ms of gove$nment! but as political units +hich! +hile having mo$e po+e$s an att$ibutes thanothe$ local gove$nment units! still $emain une$ the catego$y of local gove$nments.2ince autonomous $egions a$e classifie as local gove$nments! it follo+s that electionshel in autonomous $egions a$e also consie$e as local elections.

%. )es! 0he 2up$eme cou$t uphel the constitutionality of R' 11=> stating that the$e

18


19/75

is no incompatibility bet+een the P$esientKs po+e$ of supe$vision ove$ localgove$nments an autonomous $egions! an the po+e$ g$ante to the P$esient! +ithinthe specific confines of R' No. 11=>! to appoint #-Cs.

0he po+e$ of supe$vision is efine as the po+e$ of a supe$io$ office$ to see to it that

lo+e$ office$s pe$fo$m thei$ functions in acco$ance +ith la+. 0his is istinguishe f$omthe po+e$ of cont$ol o$ the po+e$ of an office$ to alte$ o$ moify o$ set asie +hat asubo$inate office$ ha one in the pe$fo$mance of his uties an to substitute the

ugment of the fo$me$ fo$ the latte$.

0he petitione$sK app$ehension $ega$ing the P$esientKs allege po+e$ of cont$ol ove$ the #-Cs is $oote in thei$ belief that the P$esientKs appointment po+e$ inclues thepo+e$ to $emove these officials at +ill. -n this +ay! the petitione$s fo$esee that theappointe #-Cs +ill be beholen to the P$esient! an act as $ep$esentatives of theP$esient an not of the people.

2ection > of R' No. 11=> e9p$essly cont$aicts the petitione$sK supposition. 0hep$ovision states:2ection >. 'ppointment of #ffice$sinCha$ge. I 0he P$esient shall appoint office$sincha$ge fo$ the #ffice of the Regional Gove$no$! Regional 5ice Gove$no$ an embe$sof the Regional egislative 'ssembly +ho shall pe$fo$m the functions pe$taining to thesai offices until the officials uly electe in the ay %1> elections shall have Fualifiean assume office.

0he +o$ing of the la+ is clea$. #nce the P$esient has appointe the #-Cs fo$ theoffices of the Gove$no$! 5ice Gove$no$ an membe$s of the Regional egislative

'ssembly! these same officials +ill $emain in office until they a$e $eplace by the uly

electe officials in the ay %1> elections. Nothing in this p$ovision even hints that theP$esient has the po+e$ to $ecall the appointments he al$eay mae. Clea$ly! thepetitione$sK fea$s in this $ega$ a$e mo$e appa$ent than $eal.

19


20/75

RULES ON SUCCESSION11. 0alaga v. Comelec (G.R. No. 1/68"! / #ctobe$ %1%&

FACTS:Ramon 0alaga! H$. se$ve as mayo$ of ucena City u$ing te$ms 1//%1//= an 1//=

1//8. Eu$ing the 1//8 elections! 0alaga lost to 3e$na$ G. 0aga$ao.


21/75

1%.Gamboa v. 'gui$$e (G.R. No. 1>"%1>! % Huly 1///&

FACTS:-n the 1//= elections! Rafael Coscolluela! petitione$ Romeo Gamboa an $esponentsa$celo 'gui$$e! H$. an Huan '$aneta +e$e levele Neg$os #cciental Gove$no$! 5ice

Gove$no$ an 2P membe$s! $espectively. 2ometime in 'ugust 1//=! the gove$no$ esignate as 'cting Gove$no$ fo$ the u$ation of the fo$me$Bs official t$ip ab$oa untilhis $etu$n. ;hen the 2angguniang Panlala+igan hel its $egula$ session! $esponentsFuestione the autho$ity of petitione$ to p$esie the$ein in vie+ of his esignation asacting gove$no$ an as,e him to vacate the Chai$. 0he latte$! ho+eve$! $efuse to oso. -n anothe$ session! seven membe$s of the 2P vote to allo+ petitione$ to continuep$esiing +hile fou$ othe$s vote against it. Responents file befo$e the lo+e$ cou$t apetition fo$ ecla$ato$y $elief an p$ohibition. -n the meantime! the gove$no$ $eassumehis office. 0he t$ial cou$t $ene$e a ecision an ecla$e petitione$ as tempo$a$ilylegally incapacitate to p$esie ove$ the sessions of the 2P u$ing the pe$io that he isthe acting gove$no$. Petitione$ file a petition fo$ $evie+.

ISSUE:;hethe$ o$ not Gamboa! +hile se$ving as acting gove$no$! tempo$a$ily $elinFuishe thepo+e$s! fictions! uties an $esponsibilities of the 5iceGove$no$! incluing the po+e$ top$esie ove$ the sessions of the 2P

HELD:)es. 0he ocal Gove$nment Coe p$ovies that the vice gove$no$ shall be the p$esiingoffice$ of the 2P. -n aition to such function! he becomes the gove$no$ an assumesthe highe$ office fo$ the une9pi$e te$m of his p$eecesso$! in case of pe$manentvacancy. ;hen the vacancy ho+eve$ is me$ely tempo$a$y! the vice gove$no$ shall

automatically e9e$cise the po+e$s (subect to ce$tain limitations& an pe$fo$m the utiesan functions of the gove$no$.

;hen the vice gove$no$ e9e$cises the po+e$s an uties of gove$no$! he oes notassume the latte$Bs office.


22/75

an constituting a Fuo$um shall elect among themselves a tempo$a$y p$esiing office$.0he$efo$e! the vice gove$no$ +ho became an acting gove$no$ cannot continue tosimultaneously e9e$cise the uties of the office! since the natu$e of it calls fo$ a fulltimeoccupant to ischa$ge them

22


23/75

DISCIPLINAR ACTIONSCases:

1>.GanAon v. Cou$t of 'ppeals (% 2CR' %71&

FACTS:Roolfo GanAon +as the then mayo$ of -loilo City. 1 complaints +e$e file against himon g$ouns of misconuct an misfeasance of office. 0he 2ec$eta$y of ocalGove$nment issue seve$al suspension o$e$s against GanAon base on the me$its of the complaints file against him hence GanAon +as facing about 6 ays of suspension. GanAon appeale the issue to the C' an the C' affi$me the suspensiono$e$ by the 2ec$eta$y. GanAon asse$te that the 1/87 Constitution oes not autho$iAethe P$esient no$ any of his alte$ ego to suspen an $emove local officials4 this isbecause the 1/87 Constitution suppo$ts local autonomy an st$engthens the same.;hat +as given by the p$esent Constitution +as me$e supe$viso$y po+e$.

ISSUE:;hethe$ o$ not the 2ec$eta$y of ocal Gove$nment! as the P$esientKs alte$ ego! cansuspen an o$ $emove local officials.

HELD:)es. GanAon is une$ the imp$ession that the Constitution has left the P$esient me$esupe$viso$y po+e$s! +hich supposely e9clues the po+e$ of investigation! an eniehe$ cont$ol! +hich allegely emb$aces isciplina$y autho$ity. -t is a mista,en imp$essionbecause legally! supe$vision is not incompatible +ith isciplina$y autho$ity.

0he 2C ha occasion to iscuss the scope an e9tent of the po+e$ of supe$vision by

the P$esient ove$ local gove$nment officials in cont$ast to the po+e$ of cont$ol given tohim ove$ e9ecutive officials of ou$ gove$nment +he$ein it +as emphasiAe that the t+ote$ms! cont$ol an supe$vision! a$e t+o iffe$ent things +hich iffe$ one f$om the othe$ inmeaning an e9tent. -n aminist$ation la+ supe$vision means ove$seeing o$ the po+e$ o$ autho$ity of an office$ to see that subo$inate office$s pe$fo$m thei$ uties. -f the latte$ fail o$ neglect to fulfill them the fo$me$ may ta,e such action o$ step as p$esc$ibe byla+ to ma,e them pe$fo$m thei$ uties.

Cont$ol! on the othe$ han! means the po+e$ of an office$ to alte$ o$ moify o$ nullify of set asie +hat a subo$inate office$ ha one in the pe$fo$mance of his uties an tosubstitute the ugment of the fo$me$ fo$ that of the latte$. 3ut f$om this p$onouncementit cannot be $easonably infe$$e that the po+e$ of supe$vision of the P$esient ove$ localgove$nment officials oes not inclue the po+e$ of investigation +hen in his opinion thegoo of the public se$vice so $eFui$es.

0he 2ec$eta$y of ocal Gove$nment! as the alte$ ego of the p$esient! in suspeningGanAon is e9e$cising a vali po+e$.


24/75

1".Hoson v. 0o$$es (%/ 2CR' %7/&

FACTSPetitione$ Gove$no$ Hoson +as file a complaint befo$e the #ffice of the P$esient fo$ ba$ging violently into the session hall of the 2angguniang Panlala+igan in the companyof a$me men. 0he case +as eno$se to the E-G. ?o$ failu$e to file an ans+e$ afte$ th$ee (>& e9tensions! petitione$ +as ecla$e in efault an o$e$e the petitione$ 6ay p$eventive suspension. Petitione$ late$ otion to Conuct ?o$mal -nvestigation.E-G enie the motion ecla$ing that the submission of position pape$s substantiallycomplies +ith the $eFui$ements of p$oceu$al ue p$ocess in aminist$ativep$oceeings. ate$! the @9ecutive 2ec$eta$y! by autho$ity of the P$esient! aopte thefinings an $ecommenation of the E-G 2ec$eta$y. 0he fo$me$ impose on petitione$ the penalty of suspension f$om office fo$ si9 (6& months +ithout pay.

ISSUES;hethe$ o$ not:(a& P$eventive suspension is p$ope$4(b& P$oceu$al ue p$ocess is violate4(c& 0he $esolution of E-G 2ec$eta$y is invali on the g$oun of unue elegation4 that itis the P$esient +ho is the Eisciplining 'utho$ity! not the 2ec$eta$y of E-G4

RULING(a& )es. P$eventive suspension may be impose by the Eisciplining 'utho$ity at anytime (a& afte$ the issues a$e oine4 (b& +hen the evience of guilt is st$ong4 an (c&

given the g$avity of the offense! the$e is g$eat p$obability that the $esponent! +hocontinues to hol office! coul influence the +itnesses o$ pose a th$eat to the safety aninteg$ity of the $eco$s an othe$ evience. 0he act of $esponent in allegely ba$gingviolently into the session hall of the 2angguniang Panlala+igan in the company of a$me men constitutes g$ave misconuct. 0he allegations of complainants a$ebolste$e by the ointaffiavit of t+o (%& employees of the 2angguniangPanlala+igan. Responent +ho is the chief e9ecutive of the p$ovince is in a position toinfluence the +itnesses. ?u$the$! the histo$y of violent conf$ontational politics in thep$ovince ictates that e9t$eme p$ecautiona$y measu$es be ta,en.

(b& )es. 0he $eection of petitione$Ks $ight to a fo$mal investigation enie himp$oceu$al ue p$ocess. 2ection = of '. #. No. %> p$ovies that at the p$elimina$yconfe$ence! the -nvestigating 'utho$ity shall summon the pa$ties to consie$ +hethe$ they esi$e a fo$mal investigation. 0his p$ovision oes not give the -nvestigating

'utho$ity the isc$etion to ete$mine +hethe$ a fo$mal investigation +oul beconucte. 0he $eco$s sho+ that petitione$ file a motion fo$ fo$mal investigation.0he$e is nothing in the ocal Gove$nment Coe an its -mplementing Rules anRegulations no$ in '.#. No. %> that p$ovie that aminist$ative cases against electivelocal officials can be ecie on the basis of position pape$s. '.#. No. %> states that

24


25/75

the -nvestigating 'utho$ity may $eFui$e the pa$ties to submit thei$ $espective memo$anabut this is only afte$ fo$mal investigation an hea$ing.

(c& No. 0he E-G $esolution is vali. 0he P$esient $emains the Eisciplining 'utho$ity. ;hat is elegate is the po+e$ to investigate! not the po+e$ to iscipline. 0he

po+e$ to iscipline eviently inclues the po+e$ to investigate. 's the Eisciplining 'utho$ity! the P$esient has the po+e$ e$ive f$om the Constitution itself to investigatecomplaints against local gove$nment officials. '. #. No. %>! ho+eve$! elegates thepo+e$ to investigate to the E-G o$ a 2pecial -nvestigating Committee! as may beconstitute by the Eisciplining 'utho$ity. 0his is not unue elegation! cont$a$y topetitione$ HosonKs claim.

Lne$ the oct$ine of Fualifie political agency Q+hich $ecogniAes the establishment of a single e9ecutive! all e9ecutive an aminist$ative o$ganiAations a$e auncts of the@9ecutive Eepa$tment! the heas of the va$ious e9ecutive epa$tments a$e assistantsan agents of the Chief @9ecutive! an! e9cept in cases +he$e the Chief @9ecutive is

$eFui$e by the Constitution o$ la+ to act in pe$son o$ the e9igencies of the situationeman that he act pe$sonally! the multifa$ious e9ecutive an aminist$ative functions of the Chief @9ecutive a$e pe$fo$me by an th$ough the e9ecutive epa$tments! an theacts of the 2ec$eta$ies of such epa$tments! pe$fo$me an p$omulgate in the $egula$ cou$se of business! a$e! unless isapp$ove o$ $ep$obate by the Chief @9ecutivep$esumptively the acts of the Chief @9ecutive.

0his oct$ine is co$olla$y to the cont$ol po+e$ of the P$esient p$ovie in theConstitution. Cont$ol is sai to be the ve$y hea$t of the po+e$ of the p$esiency. 's heaof the @9ecutive Eepa$tment! the P$esient! ho+eve$! may elegate some of his po+e$sto the Cabinet membe$s e9cept +hen he is $eFui$e by the Constitution to act in pe$son

o$ the e9igencies of the situation eman that he acts pe$sonally. 0he membe$s of Cabinet may act fo$ an in behalf of the P$esient in ce$tain matte$s because theP$esient cannot be e9pecte to e9e$cise his cont$ol (an supe$viso$y& po+e$spe$sonally all the time. @ach hea of a epa$tment is! an must be! theP$esientKs alte$ ego in the matte$s of that epa$tment +he$e the P$esient is $eFui$eby la+ to e9e$cise autho$ity.

25


26/75

1=.2alalima v. Guingona (%=7 2CR' ==&

FACTS:0his is a consoliate case +hich a$ose f$om the conuct of Gove$no$ salalima! 5G

'Aaa an some sanggunian panlala+igan membe$s of 'lbay in app$op$iating th$ough

a $esolution the amount of "!7%"!"7 1.7" pai by N'P#C#R as payment of $eal estateta9es +ithout giving the va$ious of thei$ sha$e in the $eal p$ope$ty ta9 ue to them. 0heN'P#C#R an P$ovince of 'lbay ente$e into a #' to settle its ta9 liabilities .

Petitione$s see, to annul an set asie '# No. 1=> signe on 7 #ctobe$ 1//" by theP$esient an by public $esponent @9ecutive 2ec$eta$y 0eofisto 0. Guingona! H$.!app$oving the finings of fact an $ecommenations of the '


27/75

#P Case ="6/0his $efe$s to the aminist$ative complaint file against petitione$s $elative to the $etaine$ cont$act fo$ legal se$vices ente$e into bet+een the P$ovince of 'lbay! on the one han!an 'tty. Hesus R. Co$nago an the Co$tes Reyna a+ ?i$m! on the othe$! an the

isbu$sement of public fun in payment the$eof to hanle the case against NPC file+ith the sc. 0he cont$act p$ovie an acceptance fee an of =, an a contingent fee of 18S of the value of the p$ope$ty +hich is %1".

0he Committee hols that $esponents committe abuse of autho$ity une$ 2ec. 6(e&of the ocal Gove$nment Coe fo$ the follo+ing:1. 8.=million4 an=. 'itionally! as to $esponent Gove$no$! ente$ing into a $etaine$ ag$eement not only+ith the Co$tes Reyna a+ ?i$m but also +ith 'tty. Co$nago! thus e9ceeing hisautho$ity une$ Resolution No. 1/ passe by the 2angguniang Panlala+igan.

'fte$ ta,ing all the attenant ci$cumstances into consie$ation! the Committee$ecommens that the follo+ing penalties of suspensions +ithout pay be mete out:a. Responents 2alalima an 'Aaa si9 (6& months each4 anb. 'll the othe$ $esponents fou$ ("& months each.

#P Case ="710his $efe$s to the aminist$ative complaint file by the 0i+i ayo$ Naomi Co$$al fo$ abuse of autho$ity an opp$ession une$ 2ec. 6 (c& an (e& of R.'. No. 716. ayo$ Co$$al an 7 Maga+as of 0i+i file against $esponents fo$ abuse of autho$ity!misconuct in office an opp$ession. 0his aminist$ative complaint a$ose f$om the$efusal of sai $esponents to $emit 0i+iKs sha$e in the P"!7%"!"7 1.7" ta9 elinFuencypayments mae by NPC. 2ubseFuently! ayo$ Co$$al became the subect of 1=aminist$ative an c$iminal complaints file by ce$tain iniviuals. 0he p$oceeings$eveal that the same +e$e ma$,e by haste an a$bit$a$iness. 0his +as evient f$om thesta$t +hen ayo$ Co$$al +as p$eventively suspene (in 'm. Case No. =/%& evenbefo$e she coul file he$ ans+e$. -n the othe$ cases! $esponentmembe$s of 2angguniang Panlala+igan $ule that ayo$ Co$$al ha +aive he$ $ight to auceevience in he$ efense.ConseFuently! $esponents i not also fully evaluate the eviences p$esente tosuppo$t the cha$ges mae. 's such! all the ecisions of $esponents suspening ayo$ Co$$al +e$e o$e$e lifte suspene by the E-G an #P. 0hus! even the cases file+ith the #ffice of the #mbusman! +hich +e$e base on the same incientscomplaine of in the sai aminist$ative cases! +e$e subseFuently ismisse.

27


28/75

o$eove$! 2ection 6>(& of R.'. No. 7 16 e9p$essly states that! TaUny abuse of thee9e$cise of the po+e$s of p$eventive suspension shall be penaliAe as abuse of autho$ity.

'll the othe$ $esponents he$ein a$e foun guilty of opp$ession an abuse of autho$ityune$ 2ection 6(c& an (e& of R.'. No. 716. 'cco$ingly! it is $ecommene that each

of them be mete the penalty of fou$ ("& months suspension +ithout pay.

#P Case ="=0his $efe$s to the aminist$ative cha$ges file by 0abaco ayo$ 'ntonio Eemet$iouagainst Gove$no$ Romeo 2alalima fo$ violation of 2ection 6! pa$s. (c& an (& of theocal Gove$nment Coe! 2ection >! pa$. (g& of Republic 'ct No. >1/! an thep$ovisions of PE No. 1=/".

0abaco Public a$,et +as est$oye by fi$e. 2ubseFuently! the P$ovince $ep$esente by$esponent 2alalima an R)L Const$uction ente$e into a cont$act fo$ P6!78>!7>7.=/fo$ sai $epai$ an $ehabilitation afte$ a public biing. 'mong othe$s! the cont$act

stipulate that the cont$acte +o$, shoul be complete in 1= ays. Eespite the elayon the fi$st cont$act of $epai$! P$ovince $ep$esente by $esponent 2alalima ente$e intoanothe$ cont$act (@9h. 1& fo$ P"!>"!"7". +ith R)L Const$uction fo$ aitional $epai$ an $ehabilitation +o$,s fo$ the 0abaco Public a$,et.since R)L Const$uction incu$$e negative slippage +ith $espect to the $epai$ +o$,sune$ the %/ ay 1//1 cont$act as foun by C#'! it +as anomalous fo$ the P$ovinceth$ough $esponent 2alalima to ente$ into a negotiate cont$act +ith sai cont$acto$ fo$ aitional $epai$ an $ehabilitation +o$,s fo$ the 0abaco Public ma$,et. ?ailing to comply+ith the $eFui$ements of la+! the 6 a$ch 1//% cont$act is clea$ly i$$egula$! if not illegal.

P$emises consie$e! this Committee fins the $esponent guilty of abuse of autho$ity

an g$oss negligence. 'cco$ingly! it is $ecommene that the penalty of suspension+ithout pay be mete out on $esponent 2alalima fo$ five (=& months.

ISSUES:1. Ei the #ffice of the P$esient act +ith g$ave abuse of isc$etion amounting to lac, o$ e9cess of u$isiction in suspening the petitione$s fo$ pe$ios $anging f$om t+elve tot+enty months

%. Ei the #ffice of the P$esient commit g$ave abuse of isc$etion in holing thepetitione$s guilty of abuse of autho$ity in enying the unicipality of 0i+i of its $ightfulsha$e in the P"!7%"!"71.7" +hich the P$ovince of 'lbay ha $eceive f$om the NPCune$ the emo$anum of 'g$eement

>. Ei the #ffice of the P$esient commit g$ave abuse of isc$etion in suspening in#.P. Cases Nos. ="6/ an ="= petitione$ 2alalima! +ho +as $eelecte on 11 ay1//%! fo$ an allege aminist$ative offense committe u$ing his fi$st te$m4 an insuspening in #.P. Case No. ="6/ the othe$ petitione$s! some of +hom +e$e electean othe$s $eelecte on 11 ay 1//%! fo$ an allege aminist$ative offense committein 1/8/

28


29/75

HELD:1. N#! 0he fact $emains that the suspension impose fo$ each aminist$ative offensei not e9cee si9 months an the$e +as an e9p$ess p$ovision that the successive

se$vice of the suspension shoul not e9cee the une9pi$e po$tion of the te$m of officeof the petitione$s.

%.N#! Gove$no$ 2alalima specifically inclue the amounts ue to the municipalities of 0i+i an Ea$aga in as,ing NPC to settle its obligations. 0hey shoul have hel thesha$es of 0i+i an Ea$aga in t$ust pu$suant to 2ection >/(b& of the ocal Gove$nmentCoe of 1//1 an not t$eate the P"!7%"!"71.7" NPC payments as su$plusaustment.

>. )es! 0his is so because public officials cannot be subect to isciplina$y action fo$ aminist$ative misconuct committe u$ing a p$io$ te$m! as hel in Pascual vs.

P$ovincial 3oa$ of Nueva @cia an 'guinalo vs. 2antos. 0he une$lying theo$y is thateach te$m is sepa$ate f$om othe$ te$ms! an that the $eelection to office ope$ates as acononation of the office$s p$evious misconuct to the e9tent of cutting off the $ight to$emove him the$efo$.

29


30/75

16.3e$ces v. @9ecutive 2ec$eta$y (%"1 2CR' =>/&

FACTS:Petitione$ file +ith the 2angguniang Panlala+igan t+o aminist$ative cases against$esponent incumbent ayo$ an obtaine favo$able ecision suspening the latte$.

Responent ayo$ appeale to the #ffice of the P$esient Fuestioning the ecision anat the same time p$aye fo$ the stay of e9ecution in acco$ance +ith 2ec. 67(b& of theocal Gove$nment Coe (GC&. 0he #ffice of the P$esient th$u the @9ecutive2ec$eta$y i$ecte stay of e9ecution. Petitione$ file a otion fo$ Reconsie$ation but+as ismisse. Petitione$ file a petition fo$ ce$tio$a$i an p$ohibition une$ Rule 6= of the Revise Rules of Cou$t +ith p$aye$ fo$ manato$y p$elimina$y inunction! assailingthe #$e$s of the #ffice of the P$esient as having been issue +ith g$ave abuses of isc$etion. Petitione$ a$gue that 2ec. 68 of GC (1//1& impliely $epeale 2ection 6 of

'minist$ative #$e$ No. 18 (1/87&.

ISSUE:

;hethe$ o$ not 2ec. 68 of R.'. No. 716 $epeale 2ec. 6 of 'minist$ative #$e$ No.18.

HELD:N#. Petition +as ismisse. 2tay of e9ecution applie.

RATIO:0he fi$st sentence of 2ection 68 me$ely p$ovies that an appeal shall not p$event aecision f$om becoming final o$ e9ecuto$y. 's +o$e! the$e is $oom to const$ue saip$ovision as giving isc$etion to the $evie+ing officials to stay the e9ecution of theappeale ecision. 0he$e is nothing to infe$ the$ef$om that the $evie+ing officials a$e

ep$ive of the autho$ity to o$e$ a stay of the appeale o$e$. -f the intention of Cong$ess +as to $epeal 2ection 6 of 'minist$ative #$e$ No. 18! it coul have usemo$e i$ect language e9p$essive of such intention.

'n implie $epeal p$eicates the intene $epeal upon the conition that a substantialconflict must be foun bet+een the ne+ an p$io$ la+s. -n the absence of an e9p$ess$epeal! a subseFuent la+ cannot be const$ue as $epealing a p$io$ la+ unless ani$$econcible inconsistency an $epugnancy e9ists in the te$ms of the ne+ an ol la+s.

30


31/75

17.alinao v. Reyes ( %=6 2CR' 616&

31


32/75

18.The Sa"((u"!a"( Bara"(a& %$ Bara"(a& D%" Mar!a"% Mar#%s- Mu"!#!al!t& %$ Ba&%*'%"( Pr%)!"#e %$ Nue)a V!s#a&a rerese"te '& Br(&. a(a/a %se Ce"e"

Sa"t%s et al. ). Pu"%"( Bara"(a& Se)er!"% Mart!"e?

G.R. N%. 768+;+a$c >! %8

FACTS:#n Eecembe$ 6! %"! Responent a$tineA! the incumbent Punong 3a$angay of thesai local gove$nment unit! +as aminist$atively cha$ge +ith Eishonesty! isconuct in#ffice an 5iolation of the 'ntiGaft an Co$$upt p$actices 'ct by petitione$ th$ough thefiling of a ve$ifie complaint befo$e the 2anguniang 3ayan as the isciplining autho$ityove$ elective ba$angay officials pu$suant to 2ection 61 of R.'. No. 716 (ocalGove$nment Coe&. -n the 'mene 'minist$ative Complaint against $esponent!petitione$ allege the follo+ing acts committe by the fo$me$:

1. ?ailu$e to submit an fully $emit to the 3a$angay 0$easu$e$ the income of thei$ soli +aste management p$oect since %1 pa$ticula$ly the sale of fe$tiliAe$ e$ivef$om composting4

%. ?ailu$e to submit*$emit to the ba$angay t$easu$e$ the sale of $ecyclable

mate$ials ta,en f$om ga$bage collection4 >. Lsing the ga$bage t$uc, fo$ othe$ pu$poses li,e hauling san an g$avel fo$

p$ivate pe$sons +ithout moneta$y benefit to the ba$angay because no income f$om thissou$ce appea$s in the yea$ en $epo$t even if payments +e$e collecte4

". Lsing*spening ba$angay funs fo$ $epai$! gasoline! lub$icants! +heels anothe$ spa$e pa$ts of the ga$bage t$uc, instea of using the money o$ income of sait$uc, f$om the ga$bage fees collecte as income f$om its 2ol ;aste anagementP$oect4

=. LnliFuiate t$aveling e9penses fo$ 2emina$*a,bay'$al in %> becausealthough a cash avance +as mae by the $esponent fo$ the sai pu$pose! he!ho+eve$! i not atten sai semina$ because on the ates +hen he +as suppose tobe on semina$ they sa+ him in the ba$angay4 an

6. 0hat seve$al attempts to iscuss sai p$oblem u$ing sessions +e$e all in vain

because $esponent ecline to iscuss it an +oul aou$n the session.

2angguniang 3ayan ecla$e $esponent in efault fo$ failu$e to file an ans+e$ to the 'mene 'minist$ative Complaint. Pening the aminist$ative p$oceings! a$tineA+as place une$ p$eventive suspension fo$ 6 ays o$ until 'ugust 8! %=.

#n Huly %8! %=! 0he 2angguinang 3ayan $ene$e its Eecision +hich impose upona$tineA the penalty of $emoval f$om office.

32


33/75

#n 'ugust %6! %=! $esponent file a 2pecial Civil 'ction fo$ Ce$tio$a$i +ith a p$aye$ fo$ 0empo$a$y Rest$aining #$e$ an P$elimina$y -nunction befo$e the t$ial cou$t againstpetitione$ +ith the t$ial cou$t.

#ctobe$ %! %=! the t$ial cou$t ecla$e the ecision of the 2angguninang 3ayan!

$emoving $esponent f$om office! an the memo$anum implementing such ecision bymayo$ of 3agasao voi. -t maintaine that the p$ope$ cou$ts an not the petitione$! a$ empo+e$e to $emove an elective local official f$om office! in acco$ance +ith 2ec. 6 of the ocal Gove$nment Coe.


34/75

local elective official conce$ne! the ve$y evil +hich Cong$ess sought to avoi +hen itenacte 2ection 6 of the ocal Gove$nment Coe.

%. No. 0he oct$ine of sepa$ation of po+e$s is not absolute in its application4 $athe$! itshoul be applie in acco$ance +ith the p$inciple of chec,s an balances. 0he $emoval

f$om office of elective officials must not be tainte +ith pa$tisan politics an use toefeat the +ill of the voting public. Cong$ess itself sa+ it fit to vest that po+e$ in a mo$eimpa$tial t$ibunal! the cou$t. ?u$the$mo$e! the local gove$nment units a$e not ep$ive of the $ight to iscipline local elective officials4 $athe$! they a$e p$evente f$om imposing thee9t$eme penalty of ismissal.

34


35/75

1/.Att&. M!(uel M. L!"(at!"( ). C%**!ss!%" %" Ele#t!%"s a" Cesar B. Sul%"(G.R. N%. 75965

Novembe$ 1>! %%

FACTS:

-n 1//1! u$ing the fi$st te$m of $esponent 2ulong! $esponent +as aminist$ativelycha$ge ('C No. 1%/1& along +ith othe$ iniviuals +ith va$ious offenses! an that on?eb$ua$y "! 1//%! the 2angguniang Panlala+igan of amboanga el 2u$ foun himguilty of the cha$ges an o$e$e his $emoval f$om office.

#n ?eb$ua$y 17! 1//%! $eceive the copy of the ecision an he file a motion fo$ $econsie$ation an*o$ notice of appeal the follo+ing ay.

#n ?eb$ua$y %7! 1//%! the 2angguniang Panlala+igan $eFui$e Him ingating! thecomplainant in the 'minist$ative Case No. 1%/1! to file a comment on Responent2ulongKs motion fo$ $econsie$ation an*o$ notice of appeal. 3ut sai complainant ha

not complie the$e+ith.

Responent 2ulong as mayo$ again in the ay 11! 1//% an ay 8! %//= elections.

#n ay >! %1! petitione$ iguel . ingating $unning against $esponent fo$ mayo$alty! file +ith the P$ovincial @lection 2upe$viso$ in Pagaian City a petition fo$ theisFualification of $esponent 2ulong! pu$suant to "(b& of Republic 'ct No. 716(GC&! +hich isFualifies f$om $unning fo$ any elective local position those $emovef$om office as a $esult of an aminist$ative case. Petitinoe$ claime that this ecisionha become final an e9ecuto$! an conseFuently the then vicemayo$ of apuyan!5icente -mbing! too, his oath as mayo$ 'ice $esponent on a$ch >! 1//%.

Responent 2ulong einie that the ecision in 'C No. 1%/1 ha become final ane9ecuto$y.


36/75

#n 'ppeal on 'p$il "! %%! the C#@@C en banc issue its $esolution $eve$sing the$esolution of the ?i$st Eivision. -t contene that the p$ovision no longe$ applies fo$ 2ulong! having +on the ay 1//% an 1//=! espite the 2angguinang Panlala+iganKsecision +hich +as p$omulgate on ?eb$ua$y "! 1//%! $ene$e the the ecision mootan acaemic by vi$tue of 2C $uling the 'gunalo v. 2antos case. -n effect! the $e

election of $esponent 2ulong in the 1//% an 1//= elections +oul be tantamount to acoonation of the 2angguniang Panlala+igan ecision by the people of apuyan +hohave e9p$esse thei$ +ill +hen they cast thei$ votes.


37/75

%.H%". ua" M. Ha(a ). H%". Mer#ees G%?%Da%le- Pres!!"( u(e- Bra"#hVIII- Re(!%"al Tr!al C%urt- Ma"aue C!t&- Ma"aue C!t& Ma&%r Al$re% M.

Oua"%- Ma"aue C!t& V!#eMa&%r Pater"% Ca"ete a" Ma"#uae C!t& Sa"((u"!a"(Pa"(lu"(s% Me*'er Ra$ael Ma&%l

G.R. "%. 78,86;

Eecembe$ 1%! 1//=

FACTS:#n Huly %%! 1//%! c$iminal an aminist$ative complaints +e$e file against ayo$ #uano! 5ice ayo$ Canete an Councilo$ ayol! all public officials of anaue City byCounsilo$s! an all of anaue City by councilo$s agno 3. Eionson an Gauiosa #.3e$cee +ith the #ffice of the Eeputy of the #mbusman fo$ the 5isayas. 0he$esponents +e$e cha$ge fo$ having violate R.'. No. >1/ ('ntiG$aft an Co$$uptP$actices 'ct&! as amene! '$ticles 17 an 171 of the Revise Penal Coe an R.'.671>. Councilo$s Eionson an 3e$cee ave$$e that $esponent officials! acting

inconspi$acy! ha cause the alte$ation an*o$ falsification of #$inance No. 18*/% byinc$easing the allocate app$op$iation the$ein f$om P>!"/"!>6".=7 to P7!!.+ithout autho$ity f$om the 2angguniang Panglungso of anaue City.

Councilo$s Eionson an 3e$cee also move fo$ the p$eventive suspension of the$esponent officials in a sepa$ately oc,ete aminist$ative case.

#n 'ugust =! 1//%! $esponents oppose the motion fo$ p$eventive suspension anp$aye fo$ the ismissal of the complaint on the g$oun that the #mbusmansupposely +as be$eft of u$isiction to t$y! hea$ an ecie the aminist$ative case fileagainst them since! une$ 2ection 6> of the ocal Gove$nment Coe of 1//1! the po+e$

to investigate an impose aminist$ative sanctions against sai local officials! as +ell asto effect thei$ p$eventive suspension! ha no+ been veste +ith the #ffice of theP$esient.

-n thei$ opposition! file on 1 'ugust 1//%! Eionson an 3e$cee a$gue that the ocalGove$nment Coe of 1//1 coul not have $epeale! ab$ogate o$ othe$+ise moifiethe pe$tinent p$ovisions of the Constitution g$anting to the #mbusman the po+e$ toinvestigate cases against all public officials an that! in any case! the po+e$ of the#mbusman to investigate local officials une$ the #mbusman 'ct ha $emaineunaffecte by the p$ovisions of the ocal Gove$nment Coe of 1//1.

ayo$ #uano $eite$ate in his memo$anum that! une$ 2ections 61 an 6> of the ocalGove$nment Coe of 1//1! the #ffice of the P$esient! not the #ffice of the#mbusman! coul la+fully ta,e cogniAance of aminist$ative complaints against anyelective official of a p$ovince! a highly u$baniAe city o$ an inepenent component cityan to impose isciplina$y sanctions! incluing p$eventive suspensions! an that the$e+as nothing in the p$ovision of the Constitution giving to the #ffice of the #mbusmansupe$io$ po+e$s than those of the P$esient ove$ elective officials of local gove$nments.

37


38/75

#n 2petembe$ 1! 1//%! Eeputy #mbusman issue an o$e$ enying the motion toismiss an $ecommene the p$eventive suspension of the $esponent officials!the$eby fo$mally placing them une$ p$eventive suspension.

#n 2eptembe$ %=! 1//%! $esponent officials file a petition fo$ p$ohibition! +ith p$aye$

of fo$ a +$it of p$elimina$y inunction an tempo$a$y $est$aining o$e$ +ith the R0C of anaue City. R0C affi$me the petition an issue an o$e$ i$ecte at petitione$ anenoining him f$om enfo$cing him an*o$ implementing the Fuestione o$e$ of thep$eventive suspension.

ISSUE: ;hethe$ o$ not the #mbusman une$ R' 677 has been iveste of his autho$ity toconuct aminist$ative investigations ove$ local elective official by vi$tue of subseFuentenactment of R' 716.

HELD:

No. 0he autho$ity of the #mbusman ove$ local officials pu$suant to R' 677 is not$emove by GC of 1//1. 0he$e is nothing in the ocal Gove$nment Coe to inicatethat it has been $epeale! +hethe$ e9p$essly o$ impliely! the pe$tinent p$ovisionsof the#mbusman 'ct. 0he t+o statutes on the specific matte$ in Fuestion a$e not soinconsistent! let alone i$$econcilable! as to comple us to only uphol one an st$i,eo+n the othe$. ;ell is settle is the $ule that $epeals of la+s by implication a$e notfavo$e! an the cou$ts must gene$ally assume cong$uent application. 0he t+o la+smust be absolutely incompatible! an a clea$ fining the$eof must su$face! befo$e theinfe$ence of implie $epeal may be $a+n. 0he $ule is e9p$esse in the ma9im!interpretare et concordare leibus est optimus interpretendi! eve$y statue must be sointe$p$ete an b$ought into acco$ +ith othe$ la+s as to fo$m a unifo$m system of

u$isp$uence. 0he funament is that the legislatu$e shoul be p$esume to have ,no+nthe e9isting la+s on the subect an not to have enacte conflicting statutes.


39/75

>>.


40/75

all la+s on the subect.

0he autho$ity to conuct aminist$ative investigation an to impose p$eventivesuspension ove$ elective p$ovincial o$ city officials +as at that time ent$uste to theiniste$ of ocal Gove$nment until it became concu$$ent +ith the #mbusman upon the

enactment of R.'. No. 677! specifically une$ 2ections %1 an %" the$eof! to the e9tentof the common g$ant. 0he ocal Gove$nment Coe of 1//1 (R.'. No. 716&! in fine! inot effect a change f$om +hat al$eay p$evaile! the moification being only in thesubstitution of the 2ec$eta$y (the iniste$& of ocal Gove$nment by the #ffice of theP$esient.

40


41/75

%1.#ffice of the #mbusman v. Ro$igueA (G.R. No. 17%7! Huly %>! %1&

41


42/75

%%.0alaga! H$. v. 2aniganbayan (G.R. No. 16/888! Novembe$ 11! %8&

FACTS:@lan Rec$eation! -nc. file c$iminal an aminist$ative complaints against ayo$ Ramon0alaga H$. 0he complaints Dallege that petitione$! in his capacity as mayo$ of the City of

ucena! ha unla+fully g$ante favo$s to a thi$ pa$ty +ith $espect to the ope$ation of bingo games in the city! to the amage an p$euice of the complainantsD.

0he aminist$ative case +as ismisse but the c$iminal cha$ges +e$e $etaine an fileby the #ffice of the 2pecial P$osecuto$. 0h$ee info$mations +e$e file against 0alaga H$.in violation of the 'ntiG$aft an Co$$upt P$actices 'ct o$ R.'. >1/. ate$! only one of the info$mations +as $etaine +hich alleges that 0alaga H$. gave Dun+a$$ante benefitsto Hose 2y 3ang by app$oving an o$inance g$anting to 2y 3ang a local f$anchise toope$ate bingo games in the cityD. 0he p$osecution move fo$ the petitione$Bs p$eventivesuspension fo$ ninety (/& ays in acco$ance +ith 2ection 1> of R.'. No. >1/. 0he2aniganbayan g$ante the motion. 0he petitione$! then! file the p$esent Petition fo$

Ce$tio$a$i +ith an u$gent application fo$ the issuance of a tempo$a$y $est$aining o$e$ an*o$ p$elimina$y inunction une$ Rule 6= of the Rules of Cou$t.

Petitione$ contens! among othe$ things! that the info$mation o not constitutean offense. 1/! une$ +hich petitione$ is cha$ge! p$ovies:

2ection >. Co$$upt p$actices of public office$s. -n aition to acts o$ omissions of public office$s al$eay penaliAe by e9isting la+! the follo+ing shall constitute co$$uptp$actices of any public office$ an a$e he$eby ecla$e to be unla+ful: 9 9 9 (e& Causing any unue inu$y to any pa$ty! incluing the Gove$nment! o$ giving anyp$ivate pa$ty any un+a$$ante benefits! avantage o$ p$efe$ence in the ischa$ge of hisofficial! aminist$ative o$ uicial functions th$ough manifest pa$tiality! evient ba faitho$ g$oss ine9cusable negligence. 0his p$ovision shall apply to office$s an employeescha$ge +ith the g$ant of licenses o$ pe$mits o$ othe$ concessions.

Cont$a$y to the a$gument of petitione$! the la+ oes not $eFui$e that the info$mationmust allege that the acts in Fuestion Dcause inu$y to any pa$ty! +hethe$ thegove$nment o$ p$ivate pa$ty.D 0he p$esence of the +o$ Do$D clea$ly sho+s that the$e a$et+o acts +hich can be p$osecute une$ 2ection >: ?i$st! causing any unue inu$y toany pa$ty! incluing the gove$nment! an! 2econ! giving any p$ivate pa$ty any

42


43/75

un+a$$ante benefits! avantages o$ p$efe$ence. o$eove$! in Juibal v.2aniganbayan!> the Cou$t $ule that violation of 2ection > (e& of R.'. No. >1/$eFui$es p$oof of the follo+ing ?'C02:

1.


44/75

DOCTRINE OF CONDONATION%>.'guinalo v. 2antos (G.R. No. /"11=! %1 'ugust 1//%&

Pert!"e"t r%)!s!%" %$ the L%#al G%)er"*e"t C%e: Se#t!%" +8 Gr%u"s $%r D!s#!l!"ar& A#t!%"s

In this petition for certiorari and prohibition with preliminary mandatory in;unction and=or restrainin order! petitioner >odolfo ). Auinaldo assails the decision of respondent Secretary of 4ocal o'ernment dated 0arch 9?!9??@ in Adm. Case ,o. P-9@B7-?dismissing him as Governor of Cagayan.

FACTS:Petitione$ +as the uly electe Gove$no$ of the p$ovince of Cagayan! having beenelecte to sai position u$ing the local elections hel on Hanua$y 17! 1/88! to se$ve ate$m of fou$ ("& yea$s the$ef$om. #n Eecembe$ 7! 1/8/! a s+o$n #%*la!"t $%r !sl%&alt& t% the Reu'l!# an culpable violation of the Constitution +as file by5e$onico 'gatep! anuel amba an #$lino 'gatep! $espectively the mayo$s of the

municipalities of Gatta$an! 0uao an asam! all in Cagayan! against petitione$ fo$ actsthe latte$ committe u$ing the coup. Petitione$ +as $eFui$e to file a ve$ifie ans+e$ tothe complaint. -n his lette$! et!t!%"er e"!e 'e!"( r!)& t% the la""!"( %$ the coupo$ actively pa$ticipating in its e9ecution! though he amitte that he /as s&*athet!#t% the #ause %$ the re'el s%l!ers .

Responent 2ec$eta$y consie$e petitione$Bs $eply lette$ as his ans+e$ to the complaintof ayo$ 5e$onico 'gatep an othe$s. #n the basis the$eof! res%"e"t Se#retar&suse"e et!t!%"er $r%* %$$!#e fo$ si9ty (6& ays f$om notice! pening the outcomeof the fo$mal investigation into the cha$ges against him. Eu$ing the hea$ing conucteon the cha$ges against petitione$! complainants p$esente testimonial an ocumenta$y

evience to p$ove the cha$ges. Petitione$ neithe$ p$esente evience no$ even c$osse9amine the complainantBs +itnesses! choosing instea to move that $esponent2ec$eta$y inhibit himself f$om eciing the case! +hich motion +as enie. 0he$eafte$!res%"e"t Se#retar& re"ere the =uest!%"e e#!s!%" $!"!"( et!t!%"er (u!lt&as #har(e a" %rer!"( h!s re*%)al $r%* %$$!#e.

;hile this case +as pening befo$e this Cou$t! petitione$ file his ce$tificate of caniacy fo$ the position of Gove$no$ of Cagayan fo$ the ay 11! 1//% elections. 'spetitione$ /%" '& a la"sl!e *ar(!" !" the ele#t!%"s ! the $esolution pave the +ayfo$ his eventual p$oclamation as Gove$no$ of Cagayan.#ne of the th$ee g$ouns petitione$ $elies on fo$ this petition is that: the alleed act of disloyalty committed by petitioner should be pro'ed by proof beyond reasonable doubt!and not be a mere preponderance of e'idence! because it is an act punishable asrebellion under the >e'ised Penal Code.

ISSUE: ;hethe$ o$ not petitione$ shoul be $emove f$om office on the g$oun of isloyalty tothe Republic.

44


45/75

HELD:NO. Petitione$Bs $eelection to the position of Gove$no$ of Cagayan has re"ere thea*!"!strat!%" #ase e"!"( 'e$%re the C%urt *%%t a" a#ae*!# . -t appea$s that

afte$ the canvassing of votes! petitione$ ga$ne$e the most numbe$ of votes among thecaniates fo$ gove$no$ of Cagayan p$ovince. 0he $ule is that a public official can not be$emove fo$ aminist$ative misconuct committe u$ing a p$io$ te$m! since his $eelection to office ope$ates as a cononation of the office$Bs p$evious misconuct to thee9tent of cutting off the $ight to $emove him the$efo$. 0he fo$egoing $ule! ho+eve$! finsno application to c$iminal cases pening against petitione$ fo$ acts he may havecommitte u$ing the faile coup.

@Fually +ithout me$it is petitione$Bs claim that befo$e he coul be suspene o$ $emovef$om office! p$oof beyon $easonable oubt is $eFui$e inasmuch as he is cha$ge +itha penal offense of isloyalty to the Republic +hich is efine an penaliAe une$

'$ticle 1>7 of the Revise Penal Coe. Petitione$ is not being p$osecute c$iminallyune$ the p$ovisions of the Revise Penal Coe! but aminist$atively +ith the en invie+ of $emoving petitione$ as the uly electe Gove$no$ of Cagayan P$ovince fo$ actsof isloyalty to the Republic +he$e the Fuantum of p$oof $eFui$e is only substantialevience.

HEREFORE! petitione$ is he$eby GRANTED an the ecision of public $esponent2ec$eta$y of ocal Gove$nment ate a$ch 1/! 1// in 'm. Case No. P1">78/!ismissing petitione$ as Gove$no$ of Cagayan! is he$eby REVERSED.

45


46/75

%".2alumbines! H$. v. #ffice of the #mbusman (G.R. No. 18/17! %> 'p$il %1&

FACTS:2alumbies an Glena +e$e appointe as unicipal egal #ffice$*'minist$ato$ anunicipal 3uget #ffice$! $espectively! of 0ag,a+ayan! JueAon. #n ay 1>! %%!

he$ein $esponentsRica$o 'gon! Ramon 5illasanta! @lme$ EiAon! 2alvao$ 'ul an 'gnes ?abian!all membe$s of the2angguniang 3ayanof 0ag,a+ayan! file +iththe#ffice of the #mbusman a complaintagainst 2alumbies an Glena (he$eafte$ petitione$s&! the mayo$! Coleta! Hason an 'Fuino. 0he aminist$ative aspect of the casecha$ge petitione$set al. +ith Eishonesty! G$ave isconuct! G$oss Neglect of Euty!Conuct P$euicial to the 3est -nte$est of the 2e$vice! an violation of the Commissionon 'uit (C#'& Rules an the ocal Gove$nment Coe. 0he #ffice of the #mbusmanenie the p$aye$ to place petitione$set al. une$ p$eventive suspension peninginvestigation. 3y #$e$ ate?eb$ua$y 1! %=! app$ove on'p$il 11! %=! it enie themotion fo$ $econsie$ation but$oppe the mayo$ an Coleta! both elective officials! as$esponents in the aminist$ative case! the %" elections having moote the case. 0he

#ffice of the #mbusman app$ove the 2eptembe$ /! %= emo$anumabsolvingHason an 'Fuino! an fining petitione$s guilty of 2imple Neglect of Euty.

ISSUE: Dhether or not the doctrine of condonation is applicable in this case.

HELD:C%urt %$ Aeals e#!s!%" !s a$$!r*e.

POLITICAL LA: %#tr!"e %$ #%"%"at!%"

0he $eelection to office ope$ates as a cononation of the office$Ks p$evious misconuctto the e9tent of cutting off the $ight to $emove him the$efo$. 0he Cou$t shoul neve$ $emove a public office$ fo$ acts one p$io$ to his p$esent te$m of office. 0o o othe$+ise+oul be to ep$ive the people of thei$ $ight to elect thei$ office$s. ;hen the peopleelecte a man to office! it must be assume that they i this +ith ,no+lege of his lifean cha$acte$! an that they is$ega$e o$ fo$gave his faults o$ misconuct! if he habeen guilty of any.-t is not fo$ the cou$t! by $eason of such faults o$ misconuct! top$actically ove$$ule the +ill of the people. Cont$a$y to petitione$Ks asseve$ation! the nonapplication of the cononation oct$ine to appointive officials oes not violate the $ight toeFual p$otection of the la+. 0he electo$ateKs cononation of the p$evious aminist$ativeinf$actions of the $eelecte official cannot be e9tene to that of the $eappointecote$minous employees! the une$lying basis of the $ule being to uphol the +ill of thepeople e9p$esse th$ough the ballot. -n othe$ +o$s! the$e is neithe$ subve$sion of thesove$eign +ill no$ isenf$anchisement of the electo$ate to spea, of! in the case of $eappointe cote$minous employees. -t is the +ill of the populace! not the +him of onepe$son +ho happens to be the appointing autho$ity! that coul e9tinguish anaminist$ative liability. 2ince petitione$s hol appointive positions! they cannot claim themanate of the electo$ate. 0he people cannot be cha$ge +ith the p$esumption of full,no+lege of the life an cha$acte$ of each an eve$y p$obable appointee of the

46


47/75

elective official ahea of the latte$s actual $eelection.

o$eove$! as co$$ectly obse$ve by $esponents! the lac, of conspi$acy cannot beapp$eciate in favo$ of petitione$s +ho +e$e foun guilty of simple neglect of uty! fo$ if they conspi$e to act negligently! thei$ inf$action becomes intentional. 0he$e can ha$ly

be conspi$acy to commit negligence. Petitione$s fell sho$t of the $easonable iligence$eFui$e of them! fo$ failing to e9e$cise ue ca$e an p$uence in asce$taining the legal$eFui$ements an fiscal sounness of the p$oects befo$e stamping thei$ imp$imatu$ angiving thei$ avice to thei$ supe$io$.

0he appellate cou$t co$$ectly $ule that as municipal legal office$! petitione$ 2alumbiesfaile to uphol the la+ an p$ovie a soun legal assistance an suppo$t to the mayo$ in ca$$ying out the elive$y of basic se$vices an p$ovisions of aeFuate facilities +henhe avise the mayo$ to p$ocee +ith the const$uction of the subect p$oects +ithoutp$io$ competitive biing. 's pointe out by the #ffice of the 2olicito$ Gene$al! toabsolve 2alumbies is tantamount to allo+ing +ith impunity the giving of e$$oneous o$

illegal avice! +hen by la+ he is p$ecisely tas,e to avise the mayo$ on matte$s $elateto upholing the $ule of la+. -nee! a legal office$ +ho $ene$s a legal opinion on acou$se of action +ithout any legal basis becomes no iffe$ent f$om a lay pe$son +homay app$ove the same because it appea$s ustifie.

's $ega$s petitione$ Glena! the appellate cou$t hel that the imp$ope$ use of gove$nment funs upon the i$ection of the mayo$ an p$io$ avice by the municipallegal office$ i not $elieve he$ of liability fo$ +illingly coope$ating $athe$ than $egiste$inghe$ +$itten obection as municipal buget office$. 'sie f$om the lac, of competitivebiing! the appellate cou$t! pointing to the imp$ope$ itemiAation of the e9pense! helthat the funing fo$ the p$oects shoul have been ta,en f$om the capital outlays that

$efe$ to the app$op$iations fo$ the pu$chase of goos an se$vices! the benefits of +hiche9ten beyon the fiscal yea$ an +hich a to the assets of the local gove$nment unit.-t ae that cu$$ent ope$ating e9penitu$es li,e ##@*R? $efe$ to app$op$iations fo$ the pu$chase of goos an se$vices fo$ the conuct of no$mal local gove$nmentope$ations +ithin the fiscal yea$.

DENIED.

47


48/75

%=.#mbusman Ca$pioo$ales v. C' an 3inay (G.R. Nos. %171%6%7! 1 Novembe$ %1=

FACTS:#n Huly %%! %1"! a complaint*affiavit +as file by 'tty. Renato . 3onal an Nicolas

DChingD @nciso 5- befo$e the #ffice of the #mbusman against 3inay! H$. an othe$ public office$s an employees of the City Gove$nment of a,ati (3inay! H$.! et al &!accusing them of Plune$ an violation of Republic 'ct No. (R'& >1/! othe$+ise ,no+nas D0he 'ntiG$aft an Co$$upt P$actices 'ct!D in connection +ith the five (=& phases of the p$ocu$ement an const$uction of the a,ati City


49/75

#n a$ch 11! %1=! a copy of the p$eventive suspension o$e$ +as sent to the #ffice of the City ayo$! an $eceive by a$icon 'usan! a membe$ of 3inay! H$.Bs staff.

The Pr%#ee!"(s Be$%re the CA

#n even ate! 3inay! H$. file a petition fo$ certiorari befo$e the C'! oc,ete as CAG.R. SP N%. 7495! see,ing the nullification of the p$eventive suspension o$e$! anp$aying fo$ the issuance of a 0R# an*o$ ;P- to enoin its implementation. Pr!*ar!l&-B!"a&- r. ar(ue that he #%ul "%t 'e hel a*!"!strat!)el& l!a'le fo$ anyanomalous activity attening any of the five (=& phases of the a,ati Pa$,ing 3uilingp$oect.I" a"& e)e"t- B!"a&- r. #la!*e that the O*'us*a"s re)e"t!)e suse"s!%"%rer $a!le t% sh%/ that the e)!e"#e %$ (u!lt rese"te a(a!"st h!* !s str%"( !maintaining that he i not pa$ticipate in any of the pu$po$te i$$egula$ities. -n suppo$t of his p$aye$ fo$ inunctive $elief! 3inay! H$. a$gue that he has a clea$ an unmista,able$ight to hol public office! having +on by lanslie vote in the %1 an %1> elections!

an that! in vie+ of the cononation oct$ine! as +ell as the lac, of evience to sustainthe cha$ges against him! his suspension f$om office +oul unese$vely ep$ive theelecto$ate of the se$vices of the pe$son they have conscientiously chosen an vote intooffice.

#n a$ch 16! %1=! 2ec$eta$y Ro9as cause the implementation of the p$eventivesuspension o$e$ th$ough Ei$ecto$ 3$ion! +ho poste a copy the$eof on the +all of thea,ati City


50/75

. Ee ima +e$e subseFuently impleae as aitional $esponents upon 3inay! H$.Bsfiling of the amene an supplemental petition fo$ contempt (petition fo$ contempt& ona$ch 1/! %1=. 'mong othe$s! 3inay! H$. accuse the #mbusman an othe$ $esponents the$ein fo$ +illfully an maliciously igno$ing the 0R# issue by the C'against the p$eventive suspension o$e$.

The Pr%#ee!"(s Be$%re the C%urtP$io$ to the hea$ing of the o$al a$guments befo$e the C'! the #mbusman file thep$esent petition befo$e this Cou$t! assailing the C'Bs a$ch 16! %1= Resolution! +hichg$ante 3inay! H$.Bs p$aye$ fo$ 0R# an the a$ch %! %1= Resolution i$ecting he$ tofile a comment on 3inay! H$.Bs petition fo$ contempt in C'G.R. 2P No. 1>/=". 0he#mbusman claims that:(a& the C' ha no u$isiction to g$ant 3inay! H$.Bs p$aye$ fo$ a 0R#! citing 2ection 1" of R' 677! o$ D0he #mbusman 'ct of 1/8/!D +hich states that no inunctive +$it coulbe issue to elay the #mbusmanBs investigation unless the$e is p$ima facie eviencethat the subect matte$ the$eof is outsie the latte$Bs u$isiction4 an

(b& the C'Bs i$ective fo$ the #mbusman to comment on 3inay! H$.Bs petition fo$ contempt is illegal an imp$ope$! consie$ing that the #mbusman is an impeachableoffice$! an the$efo$e! cannot be subecte to contempt p$oceeings.

-n his comment file on 'p$il 6! %1=! 3inay! H$. a$gues that 2ection 1! '$ticle 5--- of the1/87 Constitution specifically g$ants the C' uicial po+e$ to $evie+ acts of any b$ancho$ inst$umentality of gove$nment! incluing the #ffice of the #mbusman! in case of g$ave abuse of isc$etion amounting to lac, o$ e9cess of u$isiction! +hich he asse$ts+as committe in this case +hen sai office issue the p$eventive suspension o$e$ against him.

3inay! H$. posits that it +as incumbent upon the #mbusman to have been app$ise of the cononation oct$ine as this +oul have +eighe heavily in ete$mining +hethe$ the$e +as st$ong evience to +a$$ant the issuance of the p$eventive suspension o$e$.-n this $elation! 3inay! H$. maintains that the C' co$$ectly enoine the implementation of the p$eventive suspension o$e$ given his clea$ an unmista,able $ight to public office!an that it is clea$ that he coul not be hel aminist$atively liable fo$ any of the cha$gesagainst him since his subseFuent $eelection in %1> ope$ate as a cononation of anyaminist$ative offenses he may have committe u$ing his p$evious te$m. 's $ega$sthe C'Bs o$e$ fo$ the #mbusman to comment on his petition fo$ contempt! 3inay! H$.submits that +hile the #mbusman is inee an impeachable office$ an! hence!cannot be $emove f$om office e9cept by +ay of impeachment! an action fo$ contemptimposes the penalty of fine an imp$isonment! +ithout necessa$ily $esulting in $emovalf$om office. 0hus! the fact that the #mbusman is an impeachable office$ shoul notep$ive the C' of its inhe$ent po+e$ to punish contempt.

ean+hile! the C' issue a Res%lut!%" g$anting 3inay! H$.Bs p$aye$ fo$ a ;P-! +hichfu$the$ enoine the implementation of the p$eventive suspension o$e$. -n so $uling! theC' foun that 3inay! H$. has an ostensible $ight to the final $elief p$aye fo$! namely! thenullification of the p$eventive suspension o$e$! in vie+ of the cononation oct$ine!

50


51/75

citing Aguinaldo v. Santos. Pa$ticula$ly! it foun that the #mbusman can ha$lyimpose p$eventive suspension against 3inay! H$. given that his $eelection in %1> asCity ayo$ of a,ati conone any aminist$ative liability a$ising f$om anomalousactivities $elative to the a,ati Pa$,ing 3uiling p$oect f$om %7 to %1>. -n this$ega$! the C' ae that! although the$e +e$e acts +hich +e$e appa$ently committe

by 3inay! H$. beyon his fi$st te$m I namely! the allege payments on Huly >! Huly "!an Huly %"! %1>!/" co$$esponing to the se$vices of


52/75

contempt +as imp$ope$ o$ illegal.

HELD:$irst Issue! the 2C $ule that the #mbusmanKs petition falls une$ the e9ceptions thata p$io$ motion fo$ $econsie$ation must be file! citing the case of >epublic '. /ayao !

.>. ,o. 97??(! G Fune (@9B! +hich hel as follo+s: (a& +he$e the o$e$ is a patentnullity! as +he$e the cou$t a Fuo has no u$isiction4 (b& +he$e the Fuestions $aise inthe ce$tio$a$i p$oceeings have been uly $aise an passe upon by the lo+e$ cou$t! o$ a$e the same as those $aise an passe upon in the lo+e$ cou$t4 (c& /here there !s a"ur(e"t "e#ess!t& $%r the res%lut!%" %$ the =uest!%" a" a"& $urther ela& /%ulre>u!#e the !"terests %$ the G%)er"*e"t %r %$ the et!t!%"er %r the su'>e#t*atter %$ the a#t!%" !s er!sha'le4 (& +he$e! une$ the ci$cumstances! a motion fo$ $econsie$ation +oul be useless4 (e& +he$e petitione$ +as ep$ive of ue p$ocess anthe$e is e9t$eme u$gency fo$ $elief4 (f& +he$e! in a c$iminal case! $elief f$om an o$e$ of a$$est is u$gent an the g$anting of such $elief by the t$ial cou$t is imp$obable4 (g& +he$ethe p$oceeings in the lo+e$ cou$t a$e a nullity fo$ lac, of ue p$ocess4 (h& +he$e the

p$oceeings +e$e e9 pa$te o$ in +hich the petitione$ ha no oppo$tunity to obect4 an (i&/here the !ssue ra!se !s %"e urel& %$ la/ %r /here u'l!# !"terest !s !")%l)e .(@mphasis supplie on the g$ouns $elie on by the 2C in this case! in $uling that nomotion fo$ $econsie$ation +as neee.&OO-N ?'5#R #? #3LE2'N

's to the Second Issue! the iscussion $evolve a$oun 2ec. 1" of Republic 'ct No.677! othe$+ise ,no+n as the #mbusman 'ct (R' 677&! mo$e pa$ticula$ly its %nPa$ag$aph states:

2ection 1". Rest$ictions. I No +$it of inunction shall be issue by any cou$t to elay

an investigation being conucte by the #mbusman une$ this 'ct! unless the$e is ap$ima facie evience that the subect matte$ of the investigation is outsie the u$isiction of the #ffice of the #mbusman.No cou$t shall hea$ any appeal o$ application fo$ $emey against the ecision o$ finingsof the #mbusman! e9cept the 2up$eme Cou$t! on pu$e Fuestion of la+.

0he 2C $ule that the %n Pa$ag$aph of 2ec. 1"! R' 677! is vague! unconstitutionalan invali. 0he 2C $elie on its $uling in the lanma$, case of Habian '. 2esierto ! BG Phil. 77 $9??%! +hich! in tu$n! hel that the "th Pa$ag$aph of 2ec. %7! R' 677! isvoi! as it ha the effect of inc$easing the appellate u$isiction of the 2C +ithout itsavice an concu$$ence! in violation of 2ec. >! '$t. 5- of the 1/87 Constitution. (0histells us that la+ye$s shoul al+ays be +a$y of $eaing R' 677 since case la+ hasaffecte it so much maybe itKs time to upate it.&

-nte$estingly! the 2C mentione the 2enate elibe$ations cite by the #mbusman! inthe c$afting of R' 677. -t Fuote the e9changes bet+een 2enato$s Hovito 2alonga!@ga$o 'nga$a! 0eofisto Guingona! H$.! an Neptali GonAales! +hich me$ely le the 2Cto be suspicious on +hethe$ sai 2enato$s +e$e tal,ing about 2ec. 1"! R' 667! o$ some othe$ p$ovision. -n othe$ +o$s! +hile the th$o+bac, +as app$eciate by the 2C!

52

http://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chanrobles.com%2Fcralaw%2F2013junedecisions.php%3Fid%3D386&h=tAQEMu562&s=1http://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chanrobles.com%2Fcralaw%2F2013junedecisions.php%3Fid%3D386&h=tAQEMu562&s=1http://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fsc.judiciary.gov.ph%2Fjurisprudence%2F1998%2Fsep1998%2F129742.htm&h=YAQFpAYWO&s=1http://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fsc.judiciary.gov.ph%2Fjurisprudence%2F1998%2Fsep1998%2F129742.htm&h=YAQFpAYWO&s=1http://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fsc.judiciary.gov.ph%2Fjurisprudence%2F1998%2Fsep1998%2F129742.htm&h=YAQFpAYWO&s=1http://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fsc.judiciary.gov.ph%2Fjurisprudence%2F1998%2Fsep1998%2F129742.htm&h=YAQFpAYWO&s=1http://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chanrobles.com%2Fcralaw%2F2013junedecisions.php%3Fid%3D386&h=tAQEMu562&s=1http://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chanrobles.com%2Fcralaw%2F2013junedecisions.php%3Fid%3D386&h=tAQEMu562&s=1


53/75

the iscussions +e$e not $eally useful in this case.

Rega$less! the 2C still $ule that the $emey of 3inay! H$. the filing of petition fo$ ce$tio$a$i pu$suant to Rule 6= of the Rules of Cou$t! to assail the #mbusmanKsp$eventive suspension o$e$ +as vali! citing the cases of &ffice of the &mbudsman

'. Capulon ! .>.,o. (@9B! 9( 0arch (@9! and 2aan '.&ffice of the &mbudsman !.>. ,o. 9@B! 9? ,o'ember (@9B. -tKs ust sa that the so$$y en of 2econPa$ag$aph of 2ec. 1"! R' 677 came as collate$al amage in this case. 0he 2C ustifieits ta,ing up this issue on its o+n motion! o$ ex mero motu! +hich it can $ightfully o!since it is! afte$ all! the 2C.OO -N?'5#R #? 3-N'): 2@C0-#N >! 'R06 #? C#N20-

0he %hird Issue is +he$e it sta$ts to become mo$e inte$esting. 61 Phil. 7> (1///&. 0he 2C pointe out that Cong$ess! in $elation to R' 677!has no autho$ity to $epeal! alte$! o$ supplement $ules conce$ning pleaing! p$actice! anp$oceu$e! an $ules allo+ing the issuance of an inunction fo$m pa$t of the cou$tKsinhe$ent po+e$! +hich (no+! citing fo$eign case la+& enable the uicia$y to accomplishits constitutionally manate functions.

0he 2C $ule that Cong$essK passing of the ?i$st Pa$ag$aph of 2ec. 1"! R' 677! +hichp$ohibits the issuance of an inunction! is an enc$oachment of the 2CKs $ulema,ingautho$ity. 'n inunction! afte$ all! is me$ely a p$ovisional an au9ilia$y $elief to p$ese$ve$ights in esse.


54/75

2ec. 1"! R' 677 is no+ beaten an baly b$uise. 0o sum it up: 0he 2econPa$ag$aph +as ecla$e unconstitutional! an the ?i$st Pa$ag$aph +as no+ eemeineffective. 's such! the C' +as hel to have co$$ectly issue the inunctive $elief inenoining the p$eventive suspension against 3inay! H$.OO-N ?'5#R #? 3-N')

0he $ourth Issue is +he$e the cononation oct$ine +as ta,en up. 0he 2C abanonethe cononation oct$ine! but $ule that the C' i not act in e9cess of u$isiction inissuing the ;P-! as it i so base on goo case la+! consie$ing that the abanonmentis p$ospective in natu$e.

-n abanoning the cononation oct$ine! the 2C emphasiAe that this +as a u$isp$uential c$eation that o$iginate in the 1/=/ Pascual case! +hich +as ecieune$ the 1/>= Constitution. -t is notable that the$e +as no legal p$eceent on the issueat that time! an the 2C $eso$te to 'me$ican autho$ities. 0he 2C state +hat appea$sthe sole basis fo$ the cononation oct$ine in Pascual! to +it:

0he +eight of autho$ities 9 9 9 seems to incline to+a$ the $ule enying the $ight to$emove one f$om office because of misconuct u$ing a p$io$ te$m! to +hich +e fullysubsc$ibe.

's can be $ea above! it is clea$ that no $eal ustification +as given fo$ the cononationoct$ine! e9cept that it seems to incline to+a$s 'me$ican autho$ities. #n this $ega$!the 2C mae its o+n investigation! an foun that the$e +as $eally no establishe+eight of autho$ities in the Lnite 2tates (L2&. -n fact! 17 2tates in the L2 haveal$eay abanone the cononation oct$ine! as pointe out by the #mbusman. 0he

2C +ent on to aopt the finings of the #mbusman in L2 u$isp$uence! +ith thecaveat that sai cases a$e me$ely guies of inte$p$etation.

Pe$haps the g$eatest victo$y in this case fo$ the #mbusman is that it +as able toconvince the 2C not to ahe$e to stare decisis! the$eby en$iching Philippine

u$isp$uence on this matte$. 0his is impo$tant! as its effects a$e fa$$eaching! since +eno+ have aitional basis to petition the abanonment of ol ineffective case la+s. ?o$ this moment of glo$y! allo+ us to Fuote i$ectly f$om the case! 'i* :

0he$efo$e! the ultimate analysis is on +hethe$ o$ not the cononation oct$ine! asespouse in Pascual! an ca$$ie ove$ in nume$ous cases afte$! can be hel up againstp$evailing legal no$ms. Note that the oct$ine of sta$e ecisis oes not p$eclue thisCou$t f$om $evisiting e9isting oct$ine. 's auge in the case of 3elgica! the sta$eecisis $ule shoul not ope$ate +hen the$e a$e po+e$ful counte$vailing consie$ationsagainst its application. -n othe$ +o$s! sta$e ecisis becomes an int$actable $ule only+hen ci$cumstances e9ist to p$eclue $eve$sal of staning p$eceent. 's the#mbusman co$$ectly points out! u$isp$uence! afte$ all! is not a $igi! atempo$alabst$action4 it is an o$ganic c$eatu$e that evelops an evolves along +ith the society+ithin +hich it th$ives. -n the +o$s of a $ecent L2 2up$eme Cou$t Eecision! XT+Uhat +e

54


55/75


56/75

0he $ifth and $inal Issue on +hethe$ the o$e$ to comment i$ecte to the#mbusman +as illegal! +as $efuse to be $esolve on the g$oun the$e a$e nocontempt p$oceeings yet. -t is the claim of the #mbusman that since she +as animpeachable office$! she coul be subecte to contempt.


57/75

C. APPOINTIVE LOCAL OFFICIALSCases:

>8. Ee Rama v. C' (G.R. No. 1>11>6! ?eb$ua$y %8! %1&

FACTS:Lpon his assumption to the position of ayo$ of Pagbilao! JueAon! petitione$ Con$ao. e Rama +$ote a lette$ ate Huly 1>! 1//= to the Civil 2e$vice Commission (o$ C2C&! see,ing the $ecall of the appointments of fou$teen (1"& municipa

tnggal pubcorp

Documents