Subject: Constitutional Law 1

Topic: Judicial Department, Article VIII, Section 2, Congress and Judicial Power
Prepared by: Joshua Anthony B. Trinanes

Title: Villavert vs. Desierto, GR No. 133715, Feb 13, 2000

Facts:
The case at bar is petition for review on certiorari, seeking the annulment of
a memorandum of the Deputy Ombudsman-Visayas, approved by the Ombudsman,
which recommended the dismissal of the petitioner from the Philippine Charity
Sweepstake Office (PCSO), Cebu, as well as the order denying the petitioner’s
motion for reconsideration. The memorandum in question held the petitioner liable
for administrative sanction of Grave Misconduct and/or Dishonesty.

Issue:
Whether or not the Supreme Court has jurisdiction over petitions on appeal
of decisions rendered by the Ombudsman in administrative cases?

Ruling:
No. In Fabian, Sec. 27 of RA 6770, which authorizes an appeal to this Court
from decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases,
was declared violative of the proscription in Sec. 30, Art. VI, of the Constitution20
against a law which increases the appellate jurisdiction of this Court without its
advice and consent. In addition, the Court noted that Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of
Civil Procedure precludes appeals from quasi-judicial agencies, like the Office of the
Ombudsman, to the Supreme Court. Consequently, appeals from decisions of the
Office of the Ombudsman in administrative cases should be taken to the Court of
Appeals under Rule 43, as reiterated in the subsequent case of Namuhe v.
Ombudsman.