100%(1)1 out of 1 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 5 - 6 out of 24 pages.
the Commission on Appointments or until the next adjournment of the Congress. 1. No. The position of Chairman of CHR is not among the positions mentioned in the first sentence of Sec. 16 Art 7 of the Constitution, which provides that the appointments which are to be made with the confirmation of CoA. Rather, it is within the authority of President, vested upon her by Constitution (2nd sentence of Sec. 16 Art 7), that she appoint executive officials without confirmation of CoA. The Commission on Appointments, by the actual exercise of its constitutionally delimited power to review presidential appointments, cannot create power to confirm appointments that the Constitution has reserved to the President alone. 2. Under the Constitutional design, ad interim appointments do not apply to appointments solely for the President to make. Ad interim appointments, by their very nature under the 1987 Constitution, extend only to appointments where the review of the Commission on Appointments is needed. That is why ad interim appointments are to remain valid until disapproval by the Commission on Appointments or until the next adjournment of Congress; but appointments that are for the President solely to make, that is, without the participation of the Commission on Appointments, cannot be ad interim appointments. Petitioner Bautista is declared to be, as she is, the duly appointed Chairman of the Commission on Human Rights and the lawful incumbent thereof, entitled to all the benefits, privileges and emoluments of said office. The temporary restraining order heretofore issued by the Court against respondent Mallillin enjoining him from dismissing or terminating personnel of the Commission on Human Rights is made permanent. ANDREUS, ANDREW T. Chapter II. REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC OFFICE Disqualifications G.R. No. 87193 June 23, 1989 JUAN GALLANOSA FRIVALDO, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, et al., respondents. Facts: The petitioner was proclaimed governor-elect of the province of Sorsogon . The League of Municipalities, Sorsogon Chapter filed with the Commission on Elections a petition for the annulment of Frivaldo; election and proclamation on the ground that he was not a Filipino citizen, having been naturalized in the United States. Petitioner admitted that he was naturalized in the United States as alleged but pleaded the special and affirmative defenses that he had sought American citizenship only to protect himself against President Marcos. Private respondents reiterated their assertion that Frivaldo was a naturalized American citizen and had not reacquired Philippine citizenship on the day of the election on January 18, 1988. He was therefore not qualified to run for and be elected governor. The Solicitor General likewise support the private respondents by contending that petitioner was not a citizen of the Philippines and had not repatriated himself after his naturalization as an American citizen. As an alien, he was disqualified from public office in the Philippines. His election did not cure this defect because the electorate of Sorsogon could not