■ Sec.
2 - imposes on these
ARTICLE IX- CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS
A. COMMON PROVISIONS
SECTION 1. The Constitutional Commissions, which shall
be independent, are the Civil Service Commission, the
Commission on Elections, and the Commission on Audit.
1. The Constitutional Commissions.
● CSC- personnel office the government
● COA- auditing office
● COMELEC- in charge with the administration
of all important electoral processes
● In order to protect their integrity, they have
been made independent constitutional bodies.
● CSC was first made a constitutional body in
1973.
● COMELEC & COA in 1935; but COA was a
one-man office.
● 1973 Constitution – expanded their
membership
● 1987 provision was based on1973 version
SECTION 2. (Please have a copy of the section at hand. Bernas,
pp. 1035-1036)
SECTION 3. The salary of the Chairman and the
Commissioners shall be fixed by law and shall not be decreased
during their tenure.
SECTION 4. The Constitutional Commissions shall appoint
their officials and employees in accordance with law.
1. Appointing power.
● Consti Coms are specifically authorized by the
Constitution to appoint their officials.
● Appointments made by them are still subject
to Civil Service Law and Rules.
SECTION 5. The Commission shall enjoy fiscal autonomy.
their approved annual appropriations shall be automatically and
regularly released.
1. Automatic release of funds.
○ DBM may not retain portion of the amount
nor may it program release.
○ “no report, no release” policy may not be
validly enforced against offices vested with
fiscal autonomy
○ appropriations must be automatically released.
SECTION 6. Each Commission en banc may promulgate its
own rules concerning pleadings and practice before it or before
any of its offices. Such rules however shall not diminish,
increase, or modify substantive rights.
● Independence of the Commissions.
○ Protective measures against outside influences
and political pressures
commissions list of prohibitions
against engaging in activities which
can distract them from their
responsibilities or subject them to
pressures and temptations.
● prohibition of “practice of
profession” does not include
teaching
● prohibition of “active
management” does not
prohibit a Commissioner
from owning business but
from being a managing
officer or member of a
governing board of a
business
● prohibition of “financial
interest” in government
contracts or franchises
applies also to contacts with
subsidiaries of government
corporations
■ Sec. 3 - protects their salary from
diminution during their continuance
in office
■ Sec. 4 - gives them independent
powers of appointment but in
accordance with law
■ Sec. 5 - gives them fiscal autonomy
● approved appropriations
shall be automatically
released and shall not be
subject to pre-audit.
■ Sec. 6 - gives them authority, sitting
en banc, to promulgate rules of
procedure.
■ In case of conflict between a rule of
procedure promulgated by a
Commission and a Rule of Court, the
rule of the Commission should
prevail if the proceeding is before a
Commission.
■ But if the proceeding is before a
court, the Rules of Court prevail.
■ The SC has no power to disapprove
Commission rules except through the
exercise of the power of "judicial
review" when such Commission rules
violate the Constitution.
■ These rules "shall not diminish,
increase,or modify substantive
rights."
■ Section 5(5), Article VIII of the
Constitution provides in part that
rules of procedure of special courts
and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain
effective unless disapproved by the
Supreme Court."
■ If, however, the rules promulgated
by a Commission are inconsistent
with a statute, the statute prevails."
 ■ Commissioners are given a fixed term
and are removable only by
impeachment
SECTION 7. (Please have a copy of the section at hand. Bernas,
p. 1038)
1. Decisions of the Commissions.
○ Commissions are collegial bodies -decisions
are made by the body.
■ not individual members
■ not subordinates of the Commission
■ not the Commission’s legal counsel
○ Decisions are reached by a majority vote of the
Commission. A majority vote suffices to
establish a decision of the Commission and the
Commissions may not promulgate a rule
which requires unanimity (en banc or in
division).
○ In COMELEC, there is a full Commission to
form en banc if there are four Commissioners
left.
○ How many votes are needed for the
Commission en banc to reach a decision?
■ Each Commission shall decide by a
majority vote of all its members any
case or matter brought before it
within sixty days from the date of its
submission for decision or resolution.
○ A resolution or decision of the COMELEC is
considered complete and validly rendered or
issued when there is concurrence by the
required majority of the Commissioners.
○ There is no decision until the draft is signed
and promulgated.
○ Section 7 sets down a mandatory period within
which decisions of the Commissions must be
reached (similar to those imposed on the
courts under Article VIII, Section 15).
○ Thus, if a decision is not reached within the
reglamentary period, such failure does not
affect the merits of the case.
○ The case must still be decided at the earliest
time possible.
○ In the case of the COMELEC, considering the
tribunal's manpower and logistic limitations, it
is sensible to treat the procedural requirements
on deadlines realistically.
■ Overly strict adherence to deadlines
might induce the Commission to
resolve election contests hurriedly by
reason of lack of material time.
■ Might allow procedural flaws to
subvert the will of the electorate and
would amount to disenfranchisement
of voters
■ ○ It included simply the professional body of
2. Review of Decisions
○ Decisions of the Commissions may be brought
to the SC on certiorari.
■ That what is referred to is a special
civil action for certiorari under Rule
65 and not review under Rule 45.
● a petitioner must first file a
motion for reconsideration, a
case may be brought to the
Supreme Court only after
reconsideration.
● certiorari may be resorted to
when there is no other plain,
speedy and adequate
remedy.
■ But reconsideration is a speedy and
adequate remedy
■ In exceptional circumstances, the SC
may dispense with the need for
reconsideration.
○ In the case of the Commission on Elections,
the prerequisite reconsideration is by the
COMELEC en banc (Article IX, C, 3)
○ Prior to June 1, 1995, decisions could be
reviewed only by the SC by certiorari under
Rule 65.
○ Now, however, judgments or final orders of
quasi-judicial agencies may be appealed to the
CA within 15 days from notice thereof.
○ The certiorari jurisdiction of the SC is limited
to decisions rendered in actions or proceedings
taken cognizance of by the Commissions in
the exercise of their adjudicatory or quasi-
judicial powers.
■ It does not refer to purely executive
powers such as those which relate to
the COMELEC's appointing power.
■ Similarly, actions taken by the
Commission on Elections as
prosecutor come under the
jurisdiction of the trial court which
has acquired jurisdiction over the
criminal case.
Sec. 8. Each Commission shall perform such other functions
as may be provided bylaw.
B. THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
Sec. 1. (Please have a copy of the section at hand. Bernas, pp.
1043-1044)
1. Purpose and History of the System.
● The origin of the term civil service dates back to 1854
when Sir Charles Trevelyan borrowed it from the
British administration in India and applied it to English
conditions.
officials employed by the state in nonmilitary
and non-judicial services.
○ The term was introduced into Philippine public
law by early American administrators.
 ● 1935 Constitution merely set down the underlying
principles of a civil service system and commanded that
a civil service system be created by law
● 1973 Constitution itself created the system complete
with basic structure, powers and prohibitions.
● Explaining the change, Delegate Gunigundo said that
a constitutionally created system was necessary because
the Civil Service created by law
○ has not been able to eradicate the ills and the
evils envisioned by the framers of the 1935
Constitution
○ was not politics-free, not graft-free and not
corruption-free
○ does not serve the interest of the people but
only the personal interest of the few and the
enhancement of family power, advancement
and prestige
● The 1987 Constitution continues the search for the
perfect Civil Service system.
● The general objective of a civil service system is to
establish and promote professionalism and
efficiency in public service.
2. Organization of the Commission.
● The Civil Service system is administered by a Civil
Service Commission composed of a Chairman and two
Commissioners appointed by the President with the
consent of the Commission on Appointments.
● The Chairman and Commissioners must be:
○ natural-born citizen
■ a reflection of the strong nationalistic
trend in the 1971 Convention
■ the original 1971 draft had
recommended merely Philippine
citizenship, not natural-bom
citizenship
■ the Commission was too powerful a
body to entrust to naturalized citizens
■ implicit in this requirement is the
distrust of naturalized citizens and
relegation of naturalized citizens to
the category of second class Filipinos
○ at least thirty-five years of age
○ with proven capacity for public administration
○ must not have been candidates for any
elective position in the elections immediately
preceding their appointment.
■ effectively excludes political lame-
ducks
● The term of Commissioners is set at 7 years and they
may not be reappointed.
○ The prohibition of reappointment applies even
if the Commissioner has served for less than
seven years.
○ Of the first Commissioners appointed,
however, the Chairman shall have a term of 7
years, another of 5 years, and the third of 3
years.
● The intent in staggering the terms of the first appointees
is to achieve continuity by not allowing the term of all
Commissioners to expire all at one time.
● Every two years, the term of one Commissioner expires
leaving always two veteran Commissioners behind.
● For the smooth functioning of the staggered rotational
system, there are two requirements.
○ appointment to any vacancy shall be only for
the unexpired portion of the term of the
predecessor
○ the starting point of all the first appointments
was February 2,1987, when the Constitution
effect, and the term of all subsequent
appointees start on a February 2 even if they
actually assume office later than February
(Gaminde v. Commission on Audit)
● When the 1987 Constitution was enacted, there was an
existing Civil Service Commission but the term of the
incumbents was not clear to the 1986 Constitutional
Commission.
● The Commission approved the provision stating that
incumbent members of the CSC, COMELEC and COA
shall continue in office for one year after the ratification
of this Constitution, unless they are sooner removed for
cause or become incapacitated to discharge the duties of
their office or appointed to a new term thereunder, and
in no case shall any Member serve longer than seven
years including service before the ratification of this
Constitution (Article XVIII, Section 15).
● The extension of the term of the old Commissioners
simply meant that that the old Commissioners used up a
portion of the tenure to which the new appointees were
entitled.
● The Gaminde doctrine also applies to the CSC and
COMELEC.
○ In fact, it should apply to any law which
provides for a staggering of appointees.
● A new provision in Article IX is the rule that "In no
case shall any Member be appointed or designated in a
temporary or acting capacity."
○ An identical provision is repeated for all three
Constitutional Commissions.
○ This is evidence of the desire to plug ways of
avoiding the 7 year maximum term.
○ Should there be a vacancy in the office of
Chairman, the vacancy may not be filled by
the President by designating one of the
Commissioners a temporary Chairman.
○ The Commission itself must choose the
temporary Chairman.
SECTION 2. (Please have a copy of the section at hand.)
I. SCOPE OF THE SYSTEM
- All branches, subdivisions, instrumentalities, and agencies of
the Government
Hence, in the CASE OF EIIB (Economic Intelligence and
Investigation Bureau) of the Department of Finance V.
Court of appeals: The Court rejected the claim of EIIB that it
was exempt from the scope of the CSC because of the primarily
confidential nature of its operation. The status of being
primarily confidential merely exempts an office from the
rules on appointment but not from other rules. The Court
ordered the EIIB to make available to the Ombudsman
documents relating to personal services and salary vouchers of
EIIB employees.
-Under the 1973 Constitution, mandatory coverage of the
system was extended to corporations owned or controlled by the
government.
Hence, in the CASE OF NHA (National Housing
Corporation) V. Juco: The court said that the intent of the
Constitution to cover all government-owned corporations could
not be circumvented through the incorporation under a general
law such as the Corporation Code.
-The 1987 Constitution modified the rule. CSC now covers not
all government-owned or controlled corporations but only those
with “ORIGINAL CHARTERS” that is, those corporations
which have been created by “SPECIAL LAW” and not through
the “GENERAL CORPORATION LAW”.
-The test for determining whether officers and employees of
government-owned corporation comes under the Civil Service
System is the “MANNER OF THE CREATION” of the
corporation which they belong.
CASE OF PNOC Energy Development Corporation V.
NLRC: If a certain case arose under the 1973 Constitution but it
is decided under the 1987 Constitution, the applicable rule is
that of the 1987 Constitution.
CASE OF Philippine Fisheries Development Authority V.
NLRC and Odin Security Agency: Entities under the civil
service system “ARE NOT COMPLETELY BEYOND THE
REACH” of “DEPARTMENT OF LABOR OR LABOR
LAWS”. When a government entity that is under the Civil
Service, enters into a contract, e.g., with a security agency or
janitorial agency, it becomes an indirect employer of the security
guards or the janitors. In such situation, under the LABOR
CODE, the liabilities for wages are joint and solidary with the
contractor.
II. CLASSIFICATION AND APPOINTMENTS
-COMPETITIVE V. NON-COMPETITIVE POSITIONS:
Appointment to a competitive position must be based on merit
and fitness, as determined as far as practicable by competitive
examinations. Appointment to a non-competitive position is
also appointed according to merit and fitness; but in their
regard merit and fitness are not determined by competitive
examinations but by other modes which may be prescribed by
law (ex: law might prescribe a certain level of academic degree
as a requirement for fitness).
Career Service and Non-Career Service (as provided in CIVIL
SERVICE CODE, P.D. No. 807, now embodied in BOOK V,
CHAPTER 2, Revised Administrative Code of 1987)
Section 5: Career Service shall be characterized by:
(1) Entrance based on merit and fitness to be
determined as far as practicable by competitive
examinations or based on highly technical
qualifications
(2) Opportunity for advancement to higher career
positions
(3) Security of tenure
Section 6: Non-Career Service shall be characterized by:
(1) Entrance on bases other than those of the usual
tests of merit and fitness utilized for the career
service
(2) Tenure which is limited to a period specified by
law, or which is coterminous with that of the
appointing authority or subject to his pleasure, or
which is limited to the duration of a particular
project for which purpose employment was made.
III. ROLE OF THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION IN
APPOINTMENTS.
-The role of CSC in the appointing process is limited to the
determination of the qualifications of the candidates for
appointment.
-It plays no role in the choice of the person to be appointed
- For instance, more than one person is qualified for a position
and the appointing authority chooses the one who is less
qualified, CSC may not revoke such appointment in order to
place one is qualified.
However, IN THE CASE OF AQUINO V. CSC: When, after
having extended an appointment that is immediately accepted,
the appointing authority withdraws the same and extends it to
someone else; in such situation, the CSC is within its authority
when it orders the reinstatement of the first appointee. For the
withdrawal of an appointment already accepted would be
tantamount to removal and would violate security of tenure.
IV. SECURITY OF TENURE
-A guarantee against arbitrary impairment, whether total or
partial, of the right to continue in the position held.
-The distinction between competitive and non-competitive
positions is significant only for purposes of appointment not
security of tenure.
-However, "officials and employees holding primarily
confidential positions continue only for so long as confidence in
them endures. The termination of their official relation can be
justified on the ground of loss of confidence because in that
case their cessation from office involves no removal but the
expiration of the term of office.
In terms of the validity of abolition of office,
THE CASE OF Briones V. Osmeria provides that, abolition
of office does not imply removal of the incumbent officer; this is
true only where the abolition of office is done in good faith and
not merely as a cover for a removal otherwise not allowed by the
Constitution.
Thus, for abolition of office to escape the taint of
unconstitutionality,
THE CASE OF Roque V. Ericta provides that, abolition of
office must be made in (1) good faith, (2) not for personal or
political reasons, and (3) not in violation of the law.
V. ELECTIONEERING OR PARTISAN POLITICAL
ACTIVITY
-Partisan political activity, which is the phrase used in previous
Constitutions, includes "every form of solicitation of the
elector's vote in favor or a specific candidate.” It includes
contribution of money for election purposes and distribution
of handbills.
-However, the provision does not "prevent any officer or
employee from expressing his views on current political
problems or issues, or from mentioning the names of candidates
for public office whom he supports.
V. RIGHT TO SELF-ORGANIZATION
-it is clear that members of the civil service can unionize. Their
right to strike, however, may be limited by law.
IN THE CASE OF SSS V. CA: The court provides that the
intent of the framers points to the understanding that the right to
organize does not include the right to strike. This does not mean,
however, that they may not be given the right to strike by statute.
SECTION 3. (Please have a copy of the section at hand.)
I. Powers of the Commission.
-it is an administrative agency
-The general objective of a civil service system is to establish
and promote professionalism and efficiency in public service.
-The power of the Commission is limited to attesting to the
eligibility or ineligibility of the appointee.
- The central personnel agency of the government
-Has the power to promulgate and enforce policies on personnel
actions, classify positions, prescribe conditions of employment
except as to compensation and other monetary benefits which
shall be provided by law
IN THE CASE OF LAZO V. CSC: The CSC may revoke a
certificate of eligibility motu proprio. The power to issue carries
with it also the power to revoke.
SECTION 4. All public officers and employees shall take an
oath or affirmation to uphold and defend this Constitution.
1. Oath to defend this Constitution.
● This provision is meant to cover all civilian public
officers, whether elective or appointive.
● A similar provision for members of the armed forces
remains in the General Provisions, Article XVI, Section
5(1).
SECTION 5. The Congress shall provide for the standardization
of compensation of government officials and employees,
including those in government-owned or controlled corporations
with original charters, taking into account the nature of the
responsibilities pertaining to, and the qualifications required for
their positions.
1. Standardization of compensation.
● Rationalization: Through collective bargaining,
employees of government corporations have been able
to secure not only higher salaries but liberal fringe
benefits as well (Integrated Reorganization Plan of
1972).
SECTION 6. No candidate who has lost in any election shall,
within one year after such election, be appointed to any office in
the Government or any Government-owned or controlled
corporations or in any of their subsidiaries.
1. Political made ducks.
● This section prohibits the appointment of defeated
candidates within one year following their defeat.
● Intended to help eradicate the “spoils system.”
SECTION 7. No elective official shall be eligible for
appointment or designation in any capacity to any public office
or position during his tenure.
Unless otherwise allowed by law or by the primary functions of
his position, no appointive official shall hold any other office or
employment in the Government or any subdivision, agency or
instrumentality thereof, including Government-owned or
controlled corporations or their subsidiaries.
1. Political opportunism and spoils.
● paragraph 1: governs elective officials
● Elective officials other than members of Congress are
prohibited from accepting appointment during their
tenure.
● If the elective official accepts an appointment without
first resigning in his elective position, the appointment
is invalid.
● Congress may not create an exception to this rule.
CASE: Flores et al. vs. Drilon and Gordon
❖ If the elective official accepts an appointment without
first resigning in his elective position, the appointment
is invalid.
 ❖ However, the elective official does not thereby forfeit
his elective seat.
● paragraph 2: deals with appointive officers
● The prohibition mentioned is not absolute: appointive
officers may hold another office (ex officio) if they are
“allowed by law or by the primary functions of their
position”.
SECTION 8. No elective or appointive public officer or
employee shall receive additional, double, or indirect
compensation, unless specifically authorized by law, nor accept
without the consent of the Congress, any present, emolument,
office, or title of any kind from any foreign government.
Pensions or gratuities shall not be considered as additional,
double, or indirect compensation.
1. Additional or double compensation.
● The prohibition against additional or double
compensation except when specifically authorized by
law is another constitutional curb on the spending
power of the government.
● Additional Compensation: when for one and the same
office for which a compensation has been fixed there is
added to such fixed compensation an extra reward in
the form, for instance, of a bonus. This is not allowed in
the absence of a law specifically authorizing such extra
reward.
● Double Compensation: two sets of compensations for
two different offices held concurrently by one officer.
There is no general prohibition against holding two
offices which are not incompatible; but when an officer
accepts a second office, he can draw the salary attached
to such second office only when he is specifically
authorized by law to receive double compensation.
● The President may authorize double compensation in
some cases (obiter dictum in Quimson vs. Ozeta).
● Bonuses given to one whose compensation under the
law is merely a per diem violate the rule against
additional compensation.
2. Present, emolument, office or title from a foreign state.
● Section 1 of Commonwealth Act 153 is the only official
comment on this provision (see p. 1071 of Bernas for a
complete copy of the provision).
C. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS
SECTION 1 (please have a copy of the section on hand)
1. Composition, qualifications, appointments, term.
· The Chairman and the Commissioners must be:
1. Natural-bom citizens of the Philippines;
2. At the time of their appointment, at least thirty-five years
of age;
3. Holders of a college degree, but a majority, including the
Chairman, must be members of the Philippine Bar who
have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten
years; and
4. Must not have been candidates for any elective position
in the immediately preceding elections.
· The Commissioners are appointed by the President with the
consent of the Commission on Appointments for a term of seven
years "without reappointment."
· The first appointees are given staggered terms of seven (3
members), five (2 members), and three years (2 members), also
"without reappointment."
· In order to preserve the symmetry of the staggered system,
the terms of all appointees have a fixed starting time, that is, on a
February 2, even if they assume office after February.
Ad interim appointment- temporary, for the intervening
time.
Is an ad interim appointment of a Commissioner a prohibited
temporary appointment?
NO. President shall have the power to make
appointments during the recess of the Congress, but such
appointments shall be effective only until disapproval by the
Commission on Appointments or until the next adjournment
of the Congress.' It is an appointment permanent in nature,
and the circumstance that it is subject to confirmation by the
Commission on Appointments does not alter its permanent
character (Summers vs. Ozaeta,).
Ad interim appointments takes effect at once. The
individual chosen may thus qualify and perform his function
without loss of time. His title to such office is complete. In
the language of the Constitution, the appointment is effective
'until disapproval by the Commission on Appointments or
until the next adjournment of the Congress (Pacete v.
Secretary of the Commission).
Is a second ad interim appointment a prohibited reappointment?
NO. The Court argued that, on the basis of the
Convention record, the purpose of the dual prohibition of
temporary appointment and of reappointment was to prevent
any body from serving beyond seven years.
Ad interim appointments and renewals of appointments
will not breach the seven-year term limit because all the
appointments and renewals of appointments are for a fixed
term. Any delay in the confirmation will not extend the expiry
date of their terms of office. In sum, therefore, in the
judgment of the Court the prohibition of reappointment is
only of one who has been confirmed by the Commission on
Appointments.
Cayateno vs Monsod
 Practice of Law- any activity, in or out of court, which
requires the application of law, legal knowledge, training and
experience. To engage in the practice of law is to perform
those acts which are characteristics of the profession.
Generally, to practice law is to give notice or render any kind
of service, which device or service requires the use in any
degree of legal knowledge or skill.
Brillantes vs Yorac
The Court said that the choice of a temporary Chairman
is an internal matter which comes under the discretion of the
Commission as a body and that such discretion cannot be
exercised for the Commission by anybody else.
SECTION 2 (please have a copy of the section on hand)
Power and Functions of COMELEC
1. Nature of the powers of the Commission.
Like the Civil Service Commission, the Commission on Elections
is an administrative agency (not a court). As such, therefore, the
powers it possesses are executive, quasi-judicial, and quasi-
legislative.
· Sole judge of all contests relating to the
elections, returns, and qualifications of all elective
local officials.
· The Commission has limited powers (Limited
Judicial Power) to issue writs of certiorari,
prohibition and mandamus granted by Section 50,
B.P. Big. 697 but only in connection with its
appellate jurisdiction under Article IX, Section 2(2).
· The COMELEC has the power to review
decisions of municipal courts on municipal election
contests. And when it does so, the entire case is not
opened as happens in appeals of criminal cases.
· In cases where the COMELEC has appellate
jurisdiction the 1993 COMELEC Rules of
Procedure have provided a uniform five (5)-day
period for taking an appeal. Section 5(5), Article
VIII of the Constitution provides in part that rules of
procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies
shall remain effective unless disapproved by the
Supreme Court.
· The Commission may punish for contempt,
such power may not be exercised in connection with
its purely executive or ministerial functions but only
in furtherance of its quasi-judicial, and now also
judicial, functions.
· Among its quasi-legislative powers is the
power to issue rules and regulations to implement
election laws.
· In case of conflict on rule of procedure between
the Commission and Rule of Court, if the
proceeding is before the Commission, the
Commission rule should prevail; but if the
proceeding is in court, the Rules of Court should
prevail.
2. Historical development of Commission's administrative
powers: 1935-1987.
Nacionalista Party v. Commission on Elections
COMELEC's power as being "preventive only and not curative
also"
Subsequent decisions, however, showed that the
characterization of the COMELEC's power by the
Nacionalista Party case as being "preventive only and
not curative also" was, perhaps, less than accurate. The
Supreme Court, in acknowledging the broad sweep of
the COMELEC's constitutional power to insure free,
orderly and honest elections, recognized in the
Commission a power which already partook of the
"curative" power to nullify improperly made canvass.
Ututalam v. Commission on Elections
Functions of the Commission under the Constitution are
essentially executive ('enforcement') and administrative
('administration') in nature.
Upheld the authority of the COMELEC to entertain the testimony
of handwriting experts as proof of the falsity of the returns.
Lagumbay v. COMELEC
Upheld the Commission's authority to exclude what the Court
characterized as statistically improbable returns.
Antonio, Jr. v. COMELEC
The Court upheld the power of the COMELEC to exclude returns
which were the product of coercion even if they be clean on their
face.
Biliwang v. COMELEC
Recognized the power of the COMELEC to annul an entire
municipal election on the ground of post-election terrorism, not,
however, specifically on the ground of its expanded jurisdiction
over election contests (understandably so because this was a pre-
proclamation controversy which moreover dealt with municipal
officials) but on the broader ground of its expanded powers.
In other words, in line with the plenitude of its powers and its
function to protect the integrity of elections, the COMELEC must
be deemed possessed of authority to annul elections where the will
of the voters has been defeated and the purity of the elections
sullied. It would be unreasonable to state that the COMELEC has
a legal duty to perform and at the same time deny it the
wherewithal to fulfill that task.
Section 5 of B.P. Big. 52
The COMELEC may call for the "holding or
continuation of the election as soon as practicable”.
The Court construe this to include the calling of a special
election in the event of a failure to elect in order to make
the COMELEC truly effective in the discharge of its
functions." Again the Court relied on the broad powers
of the COMELEC to ensure free, orderly and honest
elections.
The ascertainment of the identity of a political party and
its legitimate officers
3. Section 2(2): Election contests.
COMELEC has been given by the Constitution
"exclusive original jurisdiction over all contests relating to the
elections, returns, and qualifications of all elective regional,
provincial, and city officials, and appellate jurisdiction over all
contests involving elective municipal officials decided by trial
courts of general jurisdiction, or involving elective barangay
officials decided by trial courts of limited jurisdiction."
The general rule is that the proclamation of a congressional
candidate divests COMELEC of jurisdiction in favor of the proper
Electoral Tribunal.
In the case of local elected officials, even after proclamation the
COMELEC retains power to decide controversies like correction
of manifest errors.
COMELEC powers excludes jurisdiction over elections for the
Sangguniang Kabataan.
The Commission, because of Sections 2(1) and (3), has the power
to decide all administrative cases up to and including the
proclamation.
Before proclamation
· Any problem should be resolved in a "pre-proclamation"
proceeding by the Commission because of its powers under
Section 2(1) and (3). The only questions that may not be touched
by the Commission are "those involving the right to vote." Hence,
the COMELEC has the authority to decide whether a person has
the constitutional qualifications needed to be voted for even on
the national level.
After proclamation
When the controversy should already be a "contest" in the
technical sense (i.e., a defeated candidate seeks to oust the
proclaimed winner and claims the seat), the neat rule should be
that the Tribunals and the courts should have jurisdiction.
· While this may be the neat rule, the Supreme Court
under the 1973 Constitution did not always follow a
straight path when it came to dealing with conflicts
involving municipal offices. In a series of cases, both the
Supreme Court and the Commission followed an erratic
course in this matter by sometimes recognizing
continuing Commission jurisdiction over municipal
cases even after proclamation.178 However, in cases
where the court had actually assumed jurisdiction, the
Supreme Court invariably, i.e., at least twice, excluded
the COMELEC.
The power of the COMELEC to examine the validity of
proclamations and to nullify or approve them according to its
findings has been recognized. The broad discretion of the
COMELEC, moreover, is subject to a review power of the
Supreme Court which has been narrowed within the limits of
review by certiorari.
The pattern being followed by the Court in more recent cases
in fact is not to allow undue delay in proclamation.
Sanchez v. COMELEC and Chavez v. COMELEC
In deciding against Sanchez the Court laid down the
premise that "the policy of the election law is that pre-
proclamation controversies should be summarily decided,
consistent with the law's desire that the canvass and proclamation
be delayed as little as possible.
Jurisdiction of the COMELEC before proclamation and its
jurisdiction after proclamation.
The COMELEC's jurisdiction over a pre-proclamation
controversy is administrative or quasi-judicial and is governed by
less stringent requirements of administrative due process.
Its jurisdiction over "contests" is judicial and should be governed
by the requirements of judicial due process.
Hence, even in cases over which the Commission has both
administrative and judicial power, it does make a difference
whether the Commission will treat it as a pre-proclamation
controversy or as a contest.
4. Section 2(3): Powers not given.
· COMELEC is not empowered to decide questions
"involving the right to vote.
· Neither does the Commission have the power to transfer
municipalities from one congressional district to another for the
purpose of preserving proportionality.
· Election cases must first be decided in division. Hence, the
COMELEC en banc may not decide an election case still pending
before a division.
5. Section 2(4): Deputizing law enforcement agencies
The Commission may deputize, with the concurrence of the
President, law enforcement agencies and instrumentalities of the
Government, including the Armed Forces of the Philippines, for
the exclusive purpose of ensuring free, orderly, honest, peaceful,
and credible elections.
The Commission has no disciplinary powers over the officers it
may deputize. According to Section 2(8), all the Commission can
do is recommend disciplinary action to the President.
6. Section 2(5): Registration of parties and organizations.
Section 2(5) authorizes the Commission to register political
parties and organizations. Under the 1973 Constitution, a proper
understanding of the meaning of political parties was important
since legal effects depended on the distinction between a political
party and organizations which were not parties.
Turn-coatism- Section 6 expresses the general principle: "A free
and open party system shall be allowed to evolve according to the
free choice of the people, subject to the provisions of this Article."
For this reason the Constitution deliberately did away with the
concept of "turn-coatism.
Registration- aside from conferring juridical personality, serves
other purposes as well. It informs the people of the party's or
organization's existence and of its ideals, and it identifies the
parties and its officers for purposes of regulation by the
Commission on Elections.
Every political party or organization should be allowed to register
except:
● Religious denominations and sects;
● Those which seek to achieve their goals through violence
or unlawful means;
● Those which refuse to uphold and adhere to this
Constitution; and
● Those which are supported by any foreign government.
7. Section 2(6): Prosecution of election offenses.
Section 2(6) authorizes the Commission to investigate and
prosecute violations of election laws. This power has been
recognized as exclusive and is evidently intended to enable the
Commission to insure free, orderly and honest elections.
Fiscals or Prosecutors
1. Fiscals or Prosecutors can file information charging an
election offense only when they have been deputized by the
Commission. Nor can the Tanodbayan on its own prosecute
election offenses.
2. When Fiscals or Prosecutors are deputized by the
COMELEC, they come under the authority of the
COMELEC in the performance of the prosecutory function.
However, disciplinary authority over such Fiscals and
Prosecutors remain with the Secretary of Justice. The most
the COMELEC can do is recommend disciplinary action.
3. However the task of the COMELEC as investigator and
prosecutor, is not physical searching and gathering of proof
in support of a complaint for an alleged commission of an
election offense. A complainant, has the burden, as it is his
responsibility, to follow through his accusation and prove his
complaint.
· The power of the Commission under Section 2(6)
covers not just criminal cases but also administrative cases.
8. Section 2(7), (8), and (9): Recommendatory powers.
(7) Recommend to the congress effective measures to
minimize election spending, including limitation of places
where propaganda materials shall be posted, and to prevent
and penalize all forms of election frauds, offenses,
malpractices, and nuisance candidacies.
(8) Recommend to the president the removal of any officer or
employee it has deputized, or the imposition of any other
disciplinary action, for violation or disregard of, or
disobedience to its directive, order, or decision.
(9) Submit to the president and the Congress a comprehensive
report on the conduct of each election, plebiscite, initiative,
referendum, or recall.
SECTION 3. (Bernas, p. 1092)
Commission decisions
● Whether en banc or in division, decisions on any case or
matter are reached by majority vote.
● Does not require unanimity.
● Election cases shall be decided within 90 days within
submission – not a hard and fast rule.
● Strict adherence to deadlines might induce Comelec to
resolve cases hurriedly.
● MFRs are decided en banc; the subject for
reconsideration is a “decision”, a resolution of
substantive issues.
● Election cases are decided in division; any cases decided
en banc is null and void.
SECTION 4. (Bernas, 1093)
● Transportation and other public utilities as well as mass
media may be supervised or regulated by the
Commission.
- Can be used to disrupt elections.
● These are treated in their proper place under the Bill of
Rights.
● BP Blg. 881 commands the COMELEC to procure print
space and broadcast time to be allocated impartially
among the candidates.
● The National Press Club cried foul for freedom of
expression.
● The objective of the law to prevent rich candidates from
enjoying the undue advantage offered by huge campaign
“war chests.” – NPC v. COMELEC.
 ● Power to regulate media given to COMELEC. Section 4 ● Special preference to unaffiliated or partyless bona fide
is a delegation of rule-making authority. candidates and guarantees equal protection without
● Should the law be repealed, the COMELEC would still discrimination.
have the power to impose similar regulations.
SECTION 11. (Bernas, 1099)
SECTION 5. No pardon, amnesty, parole, or suspension of
sentence for violation of election laws, rules, and regulations shall Fiscal autonomy – helps towards strengthening the independence
be granted by the President without the favorable of the Commission.
recommendation of the Commission.
D. THE COMMISSION ON AUDIT
SECTION 6. A free and open party system shall be allowed to
evolve according to the free choice of the people, subject to the
provisions of this Article.
SECTION 1. (Please have a copy of the section at hand. Bernas
SECTION 7. No votes cast in favor of a political party, pg 1099-1100)
organization, or coalition shall be valid, except for those
registered under the party-list system as provided in this
Constitution.
1. Purpose, organization, composition, appointment.
SECTION 8. (Bernas, 1096)
- Congress:
● Sectoral Organization – a group of citizens or coalition
sharing similar physical attributes, employment, - Through its power to tax → raises public funds
interests or concerns.
● Coalition – aggrupation of duly registered national, - Through its power to appropriate → authorizes the
regional, sectoral parties or organizations for political expenditure of public funds for specific purposes
and/or election purposes.
- Administrative officials:
● Political Party – an organized group of citizens with an
advocacy or platform for the general conduct of - Collect, keep and expend these public funds
government; regularly nominates and supports certain of
its leaders and members as candidates for public office. - Keep accurate financial records
- National Party – majority of regions.
- Regional Party – majority of cities and provinces of - COA Functions:
the region.
- Examine the accuracy of the records kept
- Sectoral Party – groups belonging to: labor, peasant,
fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural - Determine whether expenditures have been made in
communities, elderly, handicapped, women, youth, conformity with law
veterans, OFWs, and professionals.
- Take corrective action when necessary
- RA 4971: The Party-List System Act
- Through COA, people can verify whether their money has been
Cannot be political parties: religious denominations or sects; properly spent
those whose ways are violence or unlawful means; those who
refuse to uphold and adhere the Constitution; and those supported
by foreign governments.
- The Commission is composed of a Chairman and two
SECTION 9. Unless otherwise fixed by the Commission in Commissioners
special cases, the election period shall commence ninety days
before the day of election and shall end thirty days thereafter. - They must be:

● Election Period – a period of time administering
elections; 90 days before elections to 30 days thereafter
● Campaign Period – period of active solicitation of votes;
period less than the election period.
- Peralta v. COMELEC (March 11, 1978)
SECTION 10. Bone fide candidates for any public office shall be
free from any form of harassment and discrimination.
(1) natural-born citizens of the Philippines
(2) at the time of their appointment, at least 35 years of age
(3) certified public accountants with a minimum of 10 years
of auditing experience, or members of the Bar with a minimum
exposure of 10 years in the practice of law (at no time shall all of
them belong to the same profession)
(4) must not have been candidates for any elective position
in the elections immediately preceding their appointment
- The Chairman and the Commissioners
(1) appointed by the President with the consent of the
Commission on Appointments
(2) have terms of seven years each (staggered)
(3) reappointment and temporary appointment or
designation are absolutely prohibited
SECTION 2. (Please have a copy of the section at hand. Bernas
pg 1101)
1. Powers and functions.
- Powers and functions of the COA:
(1) to examine and audit all forms of government revenues
(2) to examine and audit all forms of government
expenditures
(3) to settle government accounts
(4) to define the scope and techniques for its own auditing
procedures
(5) to promulgate accounting and auditing rules "including
those for the prevention and disallowance of irregular,
unnecessary, excessive, extravagant, or unconscionable
expenditures”
(6) to decide administrative cases involving expenditure of
public funds
- Power of COA to define the scope of its audit and examination
and to establish the techniques it will follow is exclusive
- Intended to prevent conflict
- Such matters require special expertise
- Auditing authority of COA over government-owned
corporations extends only to those "with original charter”
- COA has authority over accountable officers and other officers
who perform functions related to accounting such as: verification
of evaluations and computation of fees collectible and the
adoption of internal rules of control
- COA has only post-audit authority over:
(a) constitutional bodies, commissions and offices that have
been granted fiscal autonomy under this Constitution
(b) autonomous state colleges and universities
(c) other government-owned or controlled corporations and
their subsidiaries
(d) such non-governmental entities receiving subsidy or
equity, directly or indirectly, from or through the government,
which are required by law or by the granting institution to submit
to such audit as a condition of subsidy or equity.
- If the internal control system of the audited agencies is
inadequate, COA may adopt temporary or special pre-audit, as are
necessary and appropriate to correct the deficiencies.
- In cases where pre-audit is allowed and has already been
performed, COA is not estopped from making a post-audit
- Provision on post-audit → recognition of the fact that there
are certain government institutions which can be hampered in
their operation by pre-audit requirements
- Pre-audit may be imposed when found to be necessary
- COA power to settle government accounts has reference only to
liquidated claims and not to unliquidated claims.
- Said power is no more than that of Treasury Officials under the
Jones Law, which was merely to settle accounts and not claims.
CASE: Compañia General de Tabacos v. French and Unson
- An account is something which may be adjusted and liquidated
by an arithmetical process
- Treasury officials are not authorized to allow and pass in
accounts a number not the result of numerical computation upon
a subject within the operation of a mutual part of a contract
- Claims for unliquidated damages require for their settlement the
application of the qualities of judgment and discretion
- The result to be reached in such cases cannot be called an
account and are not committed by law to the control and decision
of Treasury accounting officers
CASE: Phil. Operations, Inc. v. Auditor General
- The Auditor General has no jurisdiction or power to take
cognizance of claims for unliquidated damages
- Provisions of the Constitution failed to disclose any power
vested in or granted to the Auditor General to consider claims
- All that is vested in the Auditor General is the settlement of
accounts.
- The Constitution does not grant the Auditor General the right to
consider claims.
- SC examined this law and found nothing therein to show that the
term "moneyed claims," the jurisdiction over which is granted the
Auditor General, should not be interpreted in the same sense that
it was understood prior to the adoption of the Constitution
- Same power of the Auditor General has been passed on to the
COA
CASE: Insurance Co. of North America v. Republic
- Issue: existence of a specific and fixed debt
- Auditor General has power to act on the claim; but when not
only the existence but also the amount of an unfixed and
undetermined debt is involved, said official has no competence to
consider such claim
- COA can decide money claims based on law
- However, if a money claim is denied by a law, COA has no
authority to pass judgment on the constitutionality of the law
- COA may not countermand the order and duty of the CSC to
settle an account and order payment that backwages are due a
person who has been illegally dismissed
- Back wages are not an irregular, unnecessary, excessive or
extravagant expense
CASE: Polloso v. Gangan
- National Power Corporation hired the services of a lawyer
without complying with a circular requiring prior written approval
of the Solicitor General
- COA disallowed payment to the lawyer
- It was argued that the circular requiring approval by the Solicitor
General was unconstitutional because it restricted the practice of
law
- The Court held that the circular was merely a safeguard to
prevent irregular, unnecessary, excessive and extravagant or
unconscionable expenditures
- Authority of COA, stated in terms of the authority of the Auditor
General, expressed under the 1935 Constitution, in Guevarra v.
Gimenez:
-The authority of the Auditor General is limited to the
auditing of expenditures of funds or property pertaining to, or held
in trust by, the Government or the provinces or municipalities
thereof (Article XI, Section 2, of the [1935] Constitution)
- Function is limited to:
(1) a determination of whether there is a law appropriating
funds for a given purpose
(2) whether a contract, made by the proper officer, has been
entered into in conformity with said appropriation law
(3) whether the goods or services covered by said contract
have been delivered or rendered in pursuance of the provisions
thereof, as attested to by the proper officer
(4) whether payment therefore has been authorized by the
officials of the corresponding department or bureau
- Under the 1987 Constitution, COA can "promulgate accounting
and auditing rules and regulations including those for the
prevention and disallowance of irregular, unnecessary, excessive,
extravagant, or unconscionable expenditures or uses of
government funds and properties."
- COA is responsible for the enforcement of these rules and
regulations
- Failure to comply with such regulations can be a ground for
disapproving the payment of a proposed expenditure
- SC upheld the authority of COA to:
- Disapprove payments which it finds “excessive and
disadvantageous to the government”
- Determine the meaning of “public bidding” and when there
is “failure” in the bidding
- If an expenditure is found to be unnecessary according to the
rules issued by COA, COA has authority to disallow it (ex. a
contract for a foreign consultant, even if disallowance will mean
discontinuance of foreign aid)
- Authority of COA to disallow a contract exists even after it has
been executed and goods have been delivered; in such case, the
official entering into the contract is personally liable.
- Constitutional competence of COA relates to the administrative
aspect of the expenditure of public funds
- COA has no competence relative to the criminal aspect of
irregular expenditures
- COA’s approval of vouchers does not preclude an enquiry by a
provincial fiscal to determine whether criminal liability has been
incurred
2. Private auditors.
CASE: Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) v.
Commission on Audit
- Issue: whether the COA has exclusive authority to audit
government banks
- Controversy arose from DBP's hiring of private auditors
- COA contended that its power to audit was exclusive
- COA also attempted to base its claim to exclusive auditing
power on various statutory provisions but the Court did not find
either express or implied affirmation of exclusivity
- SC pointed out that the 1986 Constitutional Commission had
deliberately made the auditing power of the COA non-exclusive.
- Reason for this non-exclusivity (given by Commissioner
Monsod):
(1) no Article should constitute a disincentive or an obstacle
to private investment
- Government institutions with private investments in
them and some of these investors require the presence of
private auditing firms
(2) there are certain instances where private auditing may be
required, like the listing in the stock exchange
- Commissioner Monsod: we do not want this provision to
be an unnecessary obstacle to privatization of these companies or
attraction of investments
- COA does not have the exclusive power to examine and
audit government agencies
- When independent private audit of certain government
agencies in addition to the COA audit can be allowed:
(1) when there is a private investment in a government-
controlled corporation
(2) when a government corporation is privatized or publicly
listed
(3) when the government borrows money from abroad (as in
the case at bar)
- Even though power of COA is not exclusive, SC affirmed that
“the COA's findings and conclusions necessarily prevail over
those of private auditors, at least insofar as government agencies
and officials are concerned”
- Such conclusion also finds support in the deliberations of the
Constitutional Commission
- The findings and conclusions of the private auditor may
guide private investors or creditors who require such private audit
- Government agencies and officials remain bound by the
findings and conclusions of the COA (unless such findings and
conclusions of the COA are modified or reversed by the courts)
- COA's non-exclusivity power is further indicated by the
constitutional power of the Central Bank found in Section 20 of
Article XII:
- Congress shall establish an independent central monetary
authority
- Governing Board members must be natural-bom Filipino
citizens, of known probity, integrity, and patriotism, the majority
of whom shall come from the private sector
- They shall also be subject to such other qualifications and
disabilities as may be prescribed by law
- Authority shall provide policy direction in the areas of
money, banking, and credit
- It shall have supervision over the operations of banks and
exercise such regulatory powers as may be provided by law over
the operations of finance companies and other institutions
performing similar functions
- SC affirmed:
- Despite the Central Bank's concurrent jurisdiction over
government banks, the COA's audit still prevails over that of the
Central Bank since the COA is the constitutionally mandated
auditor of government banks
- Matters falling under the second paragraph of Section 2,
Article IX-D of the Constitution, COA's jurisdiction is exclusive.
- Central Bank is devoid of authority to allow or disallow
expenditures of government banks since this function belongs
exclusively to the COA
3. Review of Commission's decisions.
- SC review power over COA:
- Same as that over the COMELEC
- Limited certiorari power under Rule LXV of the Rules of
Court
- SC jurisdiction over COA:
- On money matters and not over decisions on personnel
movements
- It is not the task of the SC to review a Commission "opinion" on
tax liability
SECTION 3. (Bernas pg 1109) NO LAW SHALL BE PASSED
EXEMPTING ANY ENTITY OF THE GOVERNMENT OR ITS
SUBSIDIARY IN ANY GUISE WHATEVER, OR ANY
INVESTMENT OF PUBLIC FUNDS, FROM THE
JURISDICTION OF THE COMMISSION ON AUDIT.
SECTION 4. (Bernas pg 1109) THE COMMISSION SHALL
SUBMIT TO THE PRESIDENT AND THE CONGRESS,
WITHIN THE TIME FIXED BY LAW, AN ANNUAL REPORT
COVERING THE FINANCIAL CONDITION AND
OPERATION OF THE GOVERNMENT, ITS SUBDIVISIONS,
AGENCIES, AND INSTRUMENTALITIES, INCLUDING
GOVERNMENT-OWNED OR CONTROLLED
CORPORATIONS, AND NON-GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES
SUBJECT TO ITS AUDIT, AND RECOMMEND MEASURES
NECESSARY TO IMPROVE THEIR EFFECTIVENESS AND
EFFICIENCY. IT SHALL SUBMIT SUCH OTHER REPORTS
AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY LAW.