In his capacity as COMELEC Chairman respondent Benipayo issued a memorandum in

In his capacity as comelec chairman respondent

This preview shows page 45 - 48 out of 103 pages.

In his capacity as COMELEC Chairman, respondent Benipayo issued a memorandum in April, 2001addressed to petitioner as Director IV and Cinco as Director III of the EID, designating Cinco as the officer in charge and reassigning petitioner to the Law Department. Petitioner requested Benipayo to reconsider her relief as Director IV but was denied. She also filed an administrative and criminal complaint with the Law Dept. alleging that her reassignment violated pertinent administrative and civil service laws, like the COMELEC Resolution no. 3528. During the pendency of her complaint before the Law Department, Petitioner filed the instant petition questioning the appointment and the right to remain in office of the respondents. She claims that the ad interim appointments violate the constitutional provisions on the independence of the COMELEC.
Image of page 45
Issue: Whether or not the assumption of office by respondents on the basis of the ad interim appointments issued by the President amounts to a temporary appointment prohibited by Sec 1 (2), Article 9-C of the Constitution. Ruling: No. Petitioner posits the view that an ad interim appointment can be withdrawn or revoked by the president at her pleasure, and can even be disapproved or simply by-passed by the Commission on Appointments. For this reason, petitioner claims that an ad interim appointment is temporary in character and consequently prohibited by the last sentence of by Sec 1 (2), Article 9-C of the Constitution. An ad interim appointment is permanent because it takes effect immediately and can no longer be withdrawn by the president once appointee has qualified into office. The constitution itself makes an ad interim appointment permanent in character by making it effective until disapproved by the Commission on Appointments (2 nd paragraph of Sec 16, Article 7 of the Constitution).
Image of page 46
Article VII, Section 16 RUFINO v ENDRIGA, 496 SCRA 13 ARMITA B. RUFINO, ZENAIDA R. TANTOCO, LORENZO CALMA, RAFAEL SIMPAO, JR. and FREDDIE GARCIA, petitioners, Vs. BALTAZAR N. ENDRIGA, MA. PAZ D. LAGDAMEO, PATRICIA C. SISON, IRMA PONCE-ENRILE POTENCIANO, and DOREEN FERNANDEZ, respondents. FACTS: On June 25, 1996, the Executive Order No. 30 creating the Cultural Center of the Philippines was issued by Pres. Marco as a trust governed by a Board of Trustees with seven members to preserve and promote Philippine culture. In 1972, CCP was converted into non-municipal public corporation free from influence of politics and increasing its members from 7 to 9. Later in 1985 through EO 1058, it was further increased to 11. In 1995, the former Pres. Ramos appointed members of the board of trustees of CCP led by Baltazar N. Endriga (Endriga group) until Dec. 31, 1998. However, on Dec. 22, 1998, then Pres. Estrada advised petitioners that they will be replaced by Armita B. Rufino (Rufino group). Estrada appointed 7 new trustees with a term of 4 years within which these new trustees took respective oaths of office and assumed performance of duties. A quo warranto proceeding was filed questioning the President’s authority.
Image of page 47
Image of page 48

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 103 pages?

  • Fall '16
  • President of the United States, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, Joseph Estrada

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture