Matibag Vs Benipayo Digest

MATIBAG VS.
BENIPAYO
G.R. No. 149036, April 2, 2002
DOCTRINE:
ART.VII. Section 16. The President shall nominate and, with the consent of
the Commission on Appointments, appoint the heads of the executive
departments, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, or officers
of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain, and other
officers whose appointments are vested in him in this Constitution. He
shall also appoint all other officers of the Government whose appointments
are not otherwise provided for by law, and those whom he may be
authorized by law to appoint. The Congress may, by law, vest the
appointment of other officers lower in rank in the President alone, in the
courts, or in the heads of departments, agencies, commissions, or boards.
The President shall have the power to make appointments during the
recess of the Congress, whether voluntary or compulsory, but such
appointments shall be effective only until disapproved by the Commission
on Appointments or until the next adjournment of the Congress.
FACTS:
On February 1999, petitioner Matibag was appointed Acting Director IV of the Comelecs
EID by then Comelec Chairperson Harriet Demetriou in a temporary capacity. On
March 2001, respondent Benipayo was appointed Comelec Chairman together with
other commissioners in an ad interim appointment. While on such ad interim
appointment, respondent Benipayo in his capacity as Chairman issued a Memorandum
address transferring petitioner to the Law Department. Petitioner requested Benipayo to
reconsider her relief as Director IV of the EID and her reassignment to the Law
Department. She cited Civil Service Commission Memorandum Circular No. 7 dated
April 10, 2001, reminding heads of government offices that "transfer and detail of
employees are prohibited during the election period. Benipayo denied her request for
reconsideration on April 18, 2001, citing COMELEC Resolution No. 3300 dated
November 6, 2000, exempting Comelec from the coverage of the said Memo Circular.
Petitioner appealed the denial of her request for reconsideration to the COMELEC en
banc.
She also filed an administrative and criminal complaint 16 with the Law
Department17against Benipayo, alleging that her reassignment violated Section 261 (h)
of the Omnibus Election Code, COMELEC Resolution No. 3258, Civil Service
Memorandum Circular No. 07, s. 001, and other pertinent administrative and civil service
laws, rules and regulations.
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 Benipayo,
Borra and Tuason, as Chairman and Commissioners of the COMELEC, respectively.
Petitioner claims that the ad interim appointments of Benipayo, Borra and Tuason violate
the constitutional provisions on the independence of the COMELEC.
ISSUES:
Whether or not the assumption of office by Benipayo, Borra and Tuason on the basis of
the ad interim appointments issued by the President amounts to a temporary
appointment prohibited by Section 1 (2), Article IX-C of the Constitution.
RULING:
We find petitioners argument without merit.
An ad interim appointment is a permanent appointment because it takes effect
immediately and can no longer be withdrawn by the President once the appointee has
qualified into office. The fact that it is subject to confirmation by the Commission on
Appointments does not alter its permanent character. The Constitution itself makes
an ad interim appointment permanent in character by making it effective until
disapproved by the Commission on Appointments or until the next adjournment of
Congress.
In the instant case, the President did in fact appoint permanent Commissioners to fill the
vacancies in the COMELEC, subject only to confirmation by the Commission on
Appointments. Benipayo, Borra and Tuason were extended permanent appointments
during the recess of Congress. They were not appointed or designated in a temporary or
acting capacity, unlike Commissioner Haydee Yorac in Brillantes vs. Yorac34 and Solicitor
General Felix Bautista in Nacionalista Party vs. Bautista.35 The ad interim appointments
of Benipayo, Borra and Tuason are expressly allowed by the Constitution which
authorizes the President, during the recess of Congress, to make appointments that take
effect immediately.
While the Constitution mandates that the COMELEC "shall be independent" 36, this
provision should be harmonized with the Presidents power to extend ad
interim appointments. To hold that the independence of the COMELEC requires the
Commission on Appointments to first confirm ad interim appointees before the
appointees can assume office will negate the Presidents power to make ad
interim appointments. This is contrary to the rule on statutory construction to give
meaning and effect to every provision of the law. It will also run counter to the clear
intent of the framers of the Constitution.
MATIBAG VS. BENIPAYO

G.R. No. 149036
April 2, 2002
EN BANC
FACTS:
On February 2, 1999, the COMELEC en banc appointed petitioner as "Acting Director IV"
of the EID. On February 15, 2000, then Chairperson Harriet O. Demetriou renewed the
appointment of petitioner as Director IV of EID in a "Temporary" capacity. On March 22, 2001,
President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo appointed, ad interim, Benipayo as COMELEC Chairman

together with other commisioners in an ad interim appointment.
In his capacity as COMELEC Chairman, Benipayo issued a Memorandum dated April 11,
2001 addressed to petitioner as Director IV of the EID and to Cinco as Director III also of the EID,
designating Cinco Officer-in-Charge of the EID and reassigning petitioner to the Law Department.
COMELEC EID Commissioner-in-Charge Mehol K. Sadain objected to petitioners reassignment
in a Memorandum dated April 14, 2001 addressed to the COMELEC en banc. Specifically,
Commissioner Sadain questioned Benipayos failure to consult the Commissioner-in-Charge of
the EID in the reassignment of petitioner.
Petitioner requested Benipayo to reconsider her relief as Director IV of the EID and her
reassignment to the Law Department.
Petitioner cited Civil Service Commission Memorandum Circular No. 7 dated April 10,
2001, reminding heads of government offices that "transfer and detail of employees are prohibited
during the election period beginning January 2 until June 13, 2001." Benipayo denied her request
for reconsideration on April 18, 2001, citing COMELEC Resolution No. 3300 dated November 6,
2000, Exempting the Comelec from the coverage of the said memo circular.
Petitioner appealed the denial of her request for reconsideration to the COMELEC en
banc in a Memorandum dated April 23, 2001. Petitioner also filed an administrative and criminal
complaint with the Law Department against Benipayo, alleging that her reassignment violated
Section 261 (h) of the Omnibus Election Code, COMELEC Resolution No. 3258, Civil Service
Memorandum Circular No. 07, s. 001, and other pertinent administrative and civil service laws,
rules and regulations.
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 Benipayo, Borra
and Tuason, as Chairman and Commissioners of the COMELEC, respectively. Petitioner claims
that the ad interim appointments of Benipayo, Borra and Tuason violate the constitutional
provisions on the independence of the COMELEC.
ISSUES:
Whether or not the assumption of office by Benipayo, Borra and Tuason on the basis
of the ad interim appointments issued by the President amounts to a temporary
appointmentprohibited by Section 1 (2), Article IX-C of the Constitution.
RULING:
We find petitioners argument without merit.
An ad interim appointment is a permanent appointment because it takes effect
immediately and can no longer be withdrawn by the President once the appointee has qualified
into office. The fact that it is subject to confirmation by the Commission on Appointments does not
alter its permanent character. The Constitution itself makes an ad interim appointment permanent
in character by making it effective until disapproved by the Commission on Appointments or until
the next adjournment of Congress.

Matibag Vs Benipayo Digest

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Matibag Vs Benipayo Digest

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Matibag Vs Benipayo Digest

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MATIBAG VS.

MATIBAG VS. BENIPAYO

President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo appointed, ad interim, Benipayo as COMELEC Chairman

You might also like