Copyright Notice ©

The modules, lectures presented (printed, power point, recorded), pop quizzes,
and bulletins issued by the UP Law Center during its paralegal training
programs/courses are subject of copyright protection.

Unauthorized use, copying, reproduction, sharing, distribution or alteration

thereof may constitute violation of intellectual property laws and give rise to
civil and criminal liability.

Copyright © 2022. University of the Philippines Law Center.

All rights reserved.
ADMINISTRATIVE
LAW

Prepared by:
Prof. Michael T. Tiu, Jr.
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
• The law concerning the powers and
procedures of administrative agencies,
including specially the law governing judicial
review of administrative actions (Davis)
HISTORICAL
CONSIDERATIONS
RATIONALE
• Growing complexities of modern life
• Multiplication of number of subjects needing
government regulation; and
• Increased difficulty of administering laws
(Pangasinan Transportation v. Public Service
Commission, G.R. No. 47065 (1940))
NECESSITY OF
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
• Government lacks:
• Time (to respond to problems)
• Expertise, and
• Organizational aptitude for effective and
continuing regulation of new
developments in society (Stone)
ADMINISTRATIVE
AGENCIES
DEFINITION
• Organs of government, other than a court
and other than the legislature, which affect
the rights of private parties either through
adjudication or through rule-making
(Nachura)
DEFINITION
• "Agency" includes any department, bureau,
office, commission, authority or officer of the
National Government authorized by law or
executive order to make rules, issue licenses,
grant rights or privileges, and adjudicate cases;
research institutions with respect to licensing
functions; government corporations with respect
to functions regulating private right, privileges,
occupation or business; and officials in the
exercise of disciplinary power as provided by law
(Sec. 2, Book VII, Admin. Code)
WHAT MAKES AN AGENCY
ADMINISTRATIVE?
• Where its function is primarily regulatory
even if it conducts hearings and determines
controversies to carry out its regulatory duty.
• On its rule-making authority, it is
administrative when it does not have
discretion to determine what the law shall be
but merely prescribes details for the
enforcement of the law
HOW ARE AGENCIES
CREATED?
• Constitution (e.g., CSC, COMELEC, COA, CHR)
• Statute (e.g., National Labor Relations
Commission, Securities & Exchange
Commission, Professional Regulation
Commission, Bureau of Internal Revenue,
Intellectual Property Office, Energy Regulatory
Board)
• Executive order (e.g., fact-finding agencies, truth
commissions)
• Ombudsman - Sui generis
KINDS
• Government grant or gratuity, special privilege (e.g., GSIS, SSS,
PAO)

• Carrying out the actual business of government (e.g.. BIR, Bureau

of Customs, Bureau of Immigration, Land Registration Authority)

• Service for public benefit (e.g., PhilPost, PNR, MWSS, NFA, NHA)

• Regulation of businesses affected with public interest (e.g.,

Insurance Commission, LTFRB, NTC, HLURB)

• Regulation of private businesses and individuals (e.g., SEC)

• Adjustment of individual controversies because of a strong social

policy involved (e.g., ECC, NLRC, SEC, DAR, COA)
CONTROL OF
ADMINISTRATIVE
AGENCIES
EXECUTIVE POWER OF THE
PRESIDENT
• The President shall have control of all the
executive departments, bureaus, and offices.
He shall ensure that the laws be faithfully
executed (Sec. 17, Art. VII, 1987 Const.)
• Includes the following powers:
• Control
• Supervision
CONTROL VS. SUPERVISION
• Control: Power of an officer to:

• Alter, modify, nullify or set aside what a subordinate officer

had done, and

• Substitute the judgment of the former for that of the latter

• Supervision: Overseeing or the power or authority of the officer

to see that subordinate officers perform their duties, and if the
latter fail or neglect to fulfill them, then the former may take
such action or steps as prescribed by law to make them perform
these duties

• Does not include the power to overrule their acts, if these acts
are within their discretion
CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT
• Oversight concerns post-enactment measures undertaken by
Congress:

• (a) to monitor bureaucratic compliance with program

objectives;

• (b) to determine whether agencies are properly administered;

• (c) to eliminate executive waste and dishonesty;

• (d) to prevent executive usurpation of legislative authority; and

• (e) to assess executive conformity with the congressional

perception of public interest (Macalintal v. COMELEC, Puno,
J., dissenting and concurring, G.R. No. 157013 (2007))
TYPES OF CONGRESSIONAL
OVERSIGHT
• Scrutiny: Passive inquiry to determine economy and efficiency of the
operation of government activities. Congress may:

• Request information and report from the other branches of government

• Give recommendations or pass resolutions for consideration of the

agency involved.

• Congressional Investigation: More intense digging of facts, compared to

scrutiny

• The Senate or the House of Representatives or any of its respective

committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in accordance
with its duly published rules of procedure. The rights of persons
appearing in, or affected by, such inquiries shall be respected (Sec. 21,
Art. VI, 1987 Const.)
TYPES OF CONGRESSIONAL
OVERSIGHT
• Legislative supervision (legislative veto):
Connotes a continuing and informed
awareness on the part of a congressional
committee regarding executive operations in
a given administrative area
• Allows Congress to scrutinize the exercise of
delegated law-making authority, and permits
Congress to retain part of that delegated
authority
• Not allowed under the Constitution (Abakada
Guro Partylist v. Purisima, G.R. No. 166715
(2008))
POWERS & FUNCTIONS
OF ADMINISTRATIVE
AGENCIES
POWERS
• Quasi-legislative (rule-making): The power to make rules and
regulations that results in delegated legislation that is within the
confines of the granting statute and the doctrine of non-delegability
and separability of powers

• Quasi-judicial (adjudicatory): The power to hear and determine

questions of fact to which the legislative policy is to apply and to
decide in accordance with the standards laid down by the law itself
in enforcing and administering the same law. The administrative
body exercises its quasi-judicial power when it performs in a judicial
manner an act that is essentially of an executive or administrative
nature, where the power to act in such manner is incidental to or
reasonably necessary for the performance of the executive or
administrative duty entrusted to it (Chairman and Executive
Director, Palawan Council for Sustainable Development v. Lim, G.R.
No. 183173 (2016))
QUASI-LEGISLATIVE
OR RULE-MAKING
FUNCTIONS
DELEGATION OF
LEGISLATIVE POWER
DOCTRINE OF SUBORDINATE
LEGISLATION
• Power to promulgate rules and regulations is
only limited to carrying into effect what is
provided in the legislative enactment
NON-DELEGATION
DOCTRINE
• General Rule: Potestas delegata non delegare
potest. What has been delegated cannot be
delegated.
NON-DELEGATION
DOCTRINE
• Exceptions:

• Delegation of tariff powers to the President (Sec. 28(2), Art. VI,

1987 Const.)

• Delegation of emergency powers to the President

(Sec. 23(2), Art. VI, 1987 Const.)

• Delegation to the people at large

• Delegation to local governments; and

• Delegation to administrative bodies (Abakada Guro Partylist v.

Ermita, G.R. No. 168056 (2005))
LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION
• Requisites for valid delegation

• Completeness Test: The law must be complete in itself

and must set forth the policy to be executed. The law
must be complete in all its terms and conditions when it
leaves the legislature such that when it reaches the
delegate the only thing he will have to do is enforce it
(Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. v. POEA, G.R. No. 76633
(1988))

• Sufficient Standards Test: The law must fix a standard,

the limits of which are sufficiently determinate or
determinable, to which the delegate must conform
(Abakada Guro Partylist, supra)
SUFFICIENT STANDARD
• Defines legislative policy, marks its limits,
maps out its boundaries and specifies the
public agency to apply it; and
• Indicates the circumstances under which the
legislative command is to be effected
(Santiago v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 127325
(1997); Abakada Guro Partylist, supra)
KINDS OF SUFFICIENT
STANDARDS
• Express
• Implied (Edu v. Ericta, G.R. No. L-32096
(1970))
• Embodied in other statutes on the same
matter
and not necessarily in the same law being
challenged (Chiongbian v. Orbos, G.R. No.
96754 (1995))
SUFFICIENT STANDARD IN
RATE-FIXING
• In case of a delegation of rate-fixing power, the
only standard which the legislature is required to
prescribe for the guidance of the administrative
authority is that the rate be reasonable and just.
Even in the absence of an express requirement as
to reasonableness, this standard may be implied
(PHILCOMSAT v. Alcuaz, G.R. No. 84818 (1989))
ASCERTAINMENT OF FACTS &
FILLING IN DETAILS
• Congress has two options when enacting legislation:

• It can itself formulate the details or

• It can assign to the executive branch the responsibility for making necessary
managerial decisions in conformity with those standards

• In the latter case, the law must be complete in all its essential terms and
conditions

• Thus, what is left for the executive branch or the concerned administrative
agency when it formulates rules and regulations implementing the law is to:

• Fill up details (supplementary rule-making) or

• Ascertain facts necessary to bring the law into actual operation (contingent
rule-making) (Zabal v. Duterte, G.R. No. 238467, (2019); citing Abakada Guro
Partylist, supra)
ASCERTAINMENT OF FACTS
• A statute may give to non-judicial officers:

• The power to declare the existence of facts which call into

operation the statute’s provisions, and

• To commissioners and other subordinate officers, the power

to ascertain and determine appropriate facts as a basis for
procedure in the enforcement of particular laws.

• Such functions are merely incidental to the exercise of power

granted by law to clear navigable streams of unauthorized
obstructions. They can be conferred upon executive officials
provided the party affected is given the opportunity to be heard
(Lovina v. Moreno, G.R. No. L-17821 (1963))
KINDS OF ADMINISTRATIVE
RULES & REGULATIONS
• Legislative rules: Pertains to rules and
regulations to fix details in the execution of a
policy in the law. (e.g., IRRs of the Labor Code)
• Interpretative rules: Pertains to rules and
regulations construing or interpreting the
provisions of a statute to be enforced and they are
binding on all concerned until they are changed
(e.g., BIR Circulars)
LEGISLATIVE RULES VS.
INTERPRETATIVE RULES
LEGISLATIVE RULES INTERPRETATIVE RULES

Promulgated pursuant to its quasi-legislative

Passed pursuant to its quasi-judicial capacity
functions

Creates a new law or policy with the force and Merely clarify the meaning of a pre-existing law by
effect of law inferring its implications

Needs publication Need not be published

The court may review the correctness of the

So long as the court finds that the legislative rules interpretation of the law given by the
are within the power of the agency to pass, as seen administrative body, and substitute its own view of
in the primary law, then the rules bind the court. what is correct. If it is not within the scope of the
The court cannot question the wisdom or administrative agency, the court cannot only
correctness of the policy contained in the rules. invalidate the same but not substitute its decision
or interpretation or give its own set of rules.

Due process require the parties are afforded the

Due process means the body observed the proper
opportunity to be notified and heard before the
procedure in passing rules
issuance of the ruling
REQUISITES OF A VALID
ADMINISTRATIVE RULE
• Within the scope or authority of law

• Authorized by law

• Reasonable

• It must bear a reasonable relation to the purposes for

which they are authorized to be issued (Lupangco v. CA,
G.R. No. 77372 (1988))

• Promulgated in accordance with prescribed procedure

(Lokin, Jr. v. COMELEC, G.R. Nos. 179431-32 & 180443
(2010))
RULES ON PUBLICATION
GOVERNING LAWS
• Laws shall take effect after fifteen days
following the completion of their publication
in the Official Gazette, unless it is otherwise
provided. This Code shall take effect one year
after such publication (Art. 2, Civil Code)
GOVERNING LAWS
• Sec. 3, Admin. Code. Filing.—(1) Every agency shall file
with the UP Law Center three (3) certified copies of every
rule adopted by it. Rules in force on the date of effectivity
of this Code which are not filed within three (3) months
from that date shall not thereafter be the basis of any
sanction against any party or persons.

• (2) The records officer of the agency, or his equivalent

functionary, shall carry out the requirements of this
section under pain of disciplinary action.

• (3) A permanent register of all rules shall be kept by the

issuing agency and shall be open to public inspection.
GOVERNING LAWS
• Sec. 4, Admin. Code. Effectivity.—In addition to
other rule-making requirements provided by law
not inconsistent with this Book, each rule shall
become effective fifteen (15) days from the date of
filing as above provided unless a different date is
fixed by law, or specified in the rule in cases of
imminent danger to public health, safety and
welfare, the existence of which must be expressed
in a statement accompanying the rule. The agency
shall take appropriate measures to make
emergency rules known to persons who may be
affected by them.
GOVERNING LAWS
• Because the Admin. Code does not preclude other rule-making
requirements provided by law, such as that in the Civil Code,
both publication and filing must be satisfied before the 15 day-
count begins

• These requirements of publication and filing were put in place

as safeguards against abuses on the part of lawmakers and as
guarantees to the constitutional right to due process and to
information on matters of public concern and, therefore, require
strict compliance. Failure to comply with the requirements of
publication and filing of administrative issuances renders said
issuances ineffective (Republic v. Pilipinas Shell, G.R. No.
173918 (2008))
WHEN PUBLICATION
MANDATORY
• Laws not only of general application, but also laws of local application,
private laws

• Presidential decrees and executive orders promulgated by the President

in the exercise of legislative powers whenever the same are validly
delegated by the legislature or, at present, directly conferred by the
Constitution, including even those naming a public place after a favored
individual or exempting him from certain prohibitions or requirements

• Administrative rules and regulations enforcing or implementing existing

law pursuant also to a valid delegation

• City charters

• Circulars issued by the Monetary Board not merely interpreting but

"filling in the details" of the Central Bank Act which that body is
supposed to enforce
WHEN PUBLICATION
UNNECESSARY
• Interpretative regulations

• Regulations which are merely internal in nature (regulating

only the personnel of the administrative agency and not the
published)

• Letters of instructions issued by administrative superiors

concerning the rules or guidelines to be followed by their
subordinates in the performance of their duties

• Internal instructions issued by an administrative agency

• Municipal ordinances which are governed by the Local

Government Code (Tañada v. Tuvera, G.R. No. L-63915 (1986))
PENAL RULES
GOVERNING LAW
• Sec. 6, Admin. Code. Omission of Some Rules.
– (2) Every rule establishing an offense or
defining an act which, pursuant to law is
punishable as a crime or subject to a penalty
shall in all cases be published in full text
PENAL RULES
• General Rule: Rule must not provide penal
sanctions
• Exception: A violation or infringement of a
rule or regulation validly issued can
constitute a crime punishable as provided in
the authorizing statute and by virtue of the
latter” (People v. Maceren, G.R. No. L- 32166
(1977))
REQUISITES
• For an administrative regulation to have the
force of penal law:
• The violation of the administrative regulation
must be made a crime by the delegating statute
itself; and
• The penalty for such violation must be provided
by the statute itself (Perez v. LPG Refillers
Association of the Philippines, Inc., G.R. No.
159149 (2006), citing U.S. v. Panlilio, G.R. No. L-
9876 (1914))
PENAL LAWS
• Penal laws and regulations imposing
penalties must be published before it takes
effect (People v. Que Po Lay, G.R. No. 6791
(1954))
• Penal statutes are exclusive to the legislature
and cannot be delegated. Administrative
rules and regulations must not include,
prohibit or punish acts which the law does
not even define as a criminal act (People v.
Maceren, supra)
POWER TO AMEND, REVISE,
ALTER, OR REPEAL RULES
• Following the doctrine of necessary
implication, the grant of express power to
formulate implementing rules and
regulations must necessarily include the
power to amend, revise, alter, or repeal the
same (Yazaki Torres Manufacturing, Inc. v.
CA, G.R. No. 130584 (2006))
INVESTIGATIVE POWERS
• "Investigate" means to examine, explore, inquire or delve
or probe into, research on, study. The dictionary definition
of "investigate" is "to observe or study closely: inquire into
systematically. "to search or inquire into; to subject to an
official probe; to conduct an official inquiry." The purpose
of investigation is to discover, to find out, to learn, obtain
information. Nowhere included or intimated is the notion
of settling, deciding or resolving a controversy involved in
the facts inquired into by application of the law to the
facts established by the inquiry (Cariño v. CHR, G.R. No.
96681 (1991))
INVESTIGATIVE POWERS
• Administrative agencies’ power to conduct
investigations and hearings, and make
findings and recommendations thereon is
inherent, and findings of fact by such bodies
observing procedural safeguards are accorded
the greatest respect by courts
LICENSING FUNCTION
• Sec. 2, Bk. VII, Admin. Code. Licensing
Procedure. –
• (10) “License” includes the whole or any part of any
agency permit, certificate, passport, clearance,
approval, registration, charter, membership,
statutory exemption or other form of permission, or
regulation of the exercise of a right or privilege.
• (11) “Licensing” includes agency process involving
the grant, renewal, denial, revocation, suspension,
annulment, withdrawal, limitation, amendment,
modification or conditioning of a license.
LICENSING FUNCTION
• Sec. 17, Bk. VII, Admin. Code. Licensing
Procedure
• When the grant, renewal, denial or cancellation of
a license is required to be preceded by notice and
hearing, the provisions concerning contested
cases shall apply insofar as practicable.
• Except in cases of willful violation of pertinent
laws, rules and regulations or when public
security, health, or safety requires otherwise, no
license may be withdrawn, suspended, revoked or
annulled without notice and hearing.
LICENSING FUNCTION
• Sec. 18, Bk. VII, Admin. Code. Non-
expiration of License
• Where the licensee has made timely and
sufficient application for the renewal of a license
with reference to any activity of a continuing
nature, the existing license shall not expire until
the application shall have been finally
determined by the agency.
LICENSING FUNCTION
• Notice and hearing are required in licensing
only if it is a contested case
• A license or permit is not a contract between
the sovereignty and the licensee. Rather, it is
a special privilege, a permission or authority
to do what is within its terms. It is always
revocable (Gonzalo Sy Trading v. Central
Bank, G.R. No. L-41480 (1976))
• The Admin. Code, however, prescribes notice and
hearing before it can be revoked, subject to
certain exceptions
RATE-, WAGE-, AND PRICE-
FIXING POWER
• Sec. 2(3), Book VII, Admin. Code. Definitions
• “Rate” means any charge to the public for a
service open to all and upon the same terms,
including individual or joint rates, tolls,
classification or schedules thereof, as well as
communication, mileage, kilometrage and other
special rates which shall be imposed by law or
regulation to be observed and followed by any
person.
RATE-, WAGE-, AND PRICE-
FIXING POWER
• Sec. 9(2), Book VII, Admin. Code. Public
Participation
• In the fixing of rates, no rule or final order shall
be valid unless the proposed rates shall have been
published in a newspaper of general circulation at
least 2 weeks before the first hearing thereon.
RATE-, WAGE-, AND PRICE-
FIXING POWER
• General Rule: the power to fix rates is a quasi-
legislative function, i.e., it is meant to apply to all
• Exception: It becomes quasi-judicial when the rate
is applicable only to a particular party, predicated
upon a finding of fact [PHILCOMSAT v. Alcuaz,
supra, citing Vigan Electric Light Co. v. Public
Service Commission, G.R. No. L-19850 (1964))
RATE-, WAGE-, AND PRICE-
FIXING POWER
• Under the Admin. Code, the rate-fixing power
needs to be accompanied by prior notice (via
publication) before the hearing, no matter if quasi-
legislative or quasi-judicial, as it makes no
distinction as to the character of the rate-fixing
• The power to fix rates may not be delegated to a
public service; the latter may propose new rates,
but these will not be effective without the
approval of the administrative agency (KMU v.
Garcia, G.R. No. 115381 (1994))
CONSIDERATIONS IN
FIXING RATES
• Present valuation of all property of a public
utility
• Fixed assets
QUASI-JUDICIAL OR
ADJUDICATORY
FUNCTIONS
GOVERNING LAWS
• Admin. Code

• Sec. 10. Compromise and Arbitration.

• Sec. 11. Notice and Hearing in Contested Cases.

• Sec. 12. Rules of Evidence.

• Sec. 13. Subpoena.

• Sec. 14. Decision.

• Sec. 15. Finality of Order.

• Sec. 16. Publication and Compilation of Decisions.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
VS. JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS

ADMINISTRATIVE
JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
PROCEEDINGS

NATURE OF
Inquisitorial Adversarial
PROCEEDINGS

NATURE &
Decision limited to matters of Decision includes matters
EXTENT OF
general concern brought as issue by the parties
DECISION

The agency itself may be a party to The parties are only the
PARTIES
the proceedings before it private litigations
QUASI-JUDICIAL POWER
VS. INVESTIGATIVE POWER
• The purpose of an investigation is to discover, find
out, learn, obtain information. Nowhere included
is the notion of settling, deciding or resolving
controversies in the facts inquired into by
application of the law to the facts established by
the inquiry (De Leon)
REQUISITES FOR VALID
EXERCISE
• Jurisdiction
• Due process
JURISDICTION

• A tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial functions

acts without jurisdiction if no authority has been conferred
to it by law to hear and decide cases

• Jurisdiction to hear must be explicit or by necessary

implication, conferred through the terms of the enabling
statute.

• Administrative acts done without jurisdiction are void

• Rationale: Such tribunals are mere creatures of law and

have no general powers but only such as have been
conferred upon them by law
POWERS INCLUDED IN QUASI-
JUDICIAL FUNCTION
• Subpoena power: In any contested case, the agency shall have the power to
require the attendance of witnesses or the production of books, papers,
documents and other pertinent data

• Contempt power

• General Rule: Agency may, in case of disobedience, invoke the aid of the RTC

• Exception: Applied before the agency, if the law expressly confers such power

• Power to issue search or arrest warrant

• General Rule: only judges may issue

• Exception: For a warrant of arrest issued by the Commissioner of

Immigration to be valid, it must be for the sole purpose of executing a final
order of deportation (Board of Commissioners v. De La Rosa, G.R. No. 95122
(1991))
ADMINISTRATIVE DUE
PROCESS
ADMINISTRATIVE DUE
PROCESS
• While administrative agencies are free from the rigidity of certain
procedural requirements, they cannot entirely ignore or disregard the
fundamental and essential requirements of due process in trials and
investigations of an administrative character (Ang Tibay v. CIR, G.R. No.
L-46496 (1940))

• A decision rendered without due process is void ab initio and may be

attacked at any time directly or collaterally by means of a separate action
or proceeding where it is invoked (Garcia v. Molina, G.R. No. 157383
(2010))

• In administrative proceedings, the essence of due process lies simply in the

opportunity to explain one’s side or to seek reconsideration of the action or
ruling complained of. What is proscribed is the absolute lack of notice or
hearing (Office of the Ombudsman v. Coronel, G.R. No. 164460 (2006))
CARDINAL PRIMARY RIGHTS
• Right to a hearing

• Tribunal must consider the evidence presented

• Decision must be supported by evidence

• Evidence must be substantial

• Transparency: evidence to be considered must be those presented at the

hearing or on record

• Tribunal must act on its own independent consideration of the law and
facts

• Decision must be rendered such that parties know the issues involved
and reasons for decision (Ang TIbay, supra)
CARDINAL PRIMARY RIGHTS
• Regarding the requirement that the tribunal must act on its own
independent consideration of the law and facts:

• The rule that requires an administrative officer to exercise his own

judgment and discretion does not preclude him from utilizing, as a
matter of practical administrative procedure, the aid of
subordinates to investigate and report to him the facts, on the
basis of which the officer makes his decisions (American Tobacco
Co. v. Director of Patents, G.R. No. L-26803 (1975))

• The actual exercise of the disciplining authority's prerogative

requires a prior independent consideration of the law and the
facts. Failure to comply with this requirement results in an invalid
decision (DOH v. Camposano, G.R. No. 157684 (2005))
CARDINAL PRIMARY RIGHTS
• One may be heard, not solely by verbal presentation but
also, and perhaps even many times more creditably than
oral argument, through pleadings (Mutuc v. CA, G.R.
No. 48108 (1990))
• The right to counsel is not imperative in administrative
investigations (Lumiqued v. Exevea, G.R. No. 117565
(1997))
• The holding of an adversarial trial is discretionary.
Parties cannot demand it as a matter of right (Vinta
Maritime Co., Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 113911 (1978))
RIGHT TO CROSS-
EXAMINATION
• The right of a party to confront and cross-examine
opposing witness is a fundamental right which is part of
due process (Bachrach Motor Co., Inc. v. CIR, G.R. No. L-
26136 (1978))

• The right does not necessarily require an actual cross

examination but merely an opportunity to exercise this
right if desired by the party entitled to it (Gannapao v.
CSC, G.R. No. 180141 (2011))

• However, disciplinary cases involving students need not

necessarily include the right to cross examination (UP
Board of Regents v. CA, G.R. No. 134625 (1999))
ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
• Sec. 14, Art. VIII, 1987 Const. (i.e., “No decision shall be
rendered by any court without expressing therein clearly and
distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based”) need not
apply to decisions rendered in administrative proceedings. Said
section applies only to decisions rendered in judicial
proceedings (Solid Homes, Inc. v. Laserna, G.R. No. 166051
(2008))

• Sec. 14, Bk. VII, Admin. Code. Decision. Every decision

rendered by the agency in a contested case shall be in writing
and shall state clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on
which it is based. The agency shall decide each case within
thirty (30) days following its submission. The parties shall be
notified of the decision personally or by registered mail
addressed to their counsel of record, if any, or to them
WHEN DUE PROCESS IS
VIOLATED
• There is failure to sufficiently explain the reason
for the decision rendered
• If not supported by substantial evidence
• Imputation of a violation and imposition of a fine
despite absence of due notice and hearing (Globe
Telecom v. NTC, G.R. No. 143964 (2004))
SELF-INCRIMINATION

• The right against self-incrimination may be

invoked by the respondent at the time he is called
by the complainant as a witness
• If he voluntarily takes the witness stand, he can
be cross examined; but he may still invoke the
right when the question calls for an answer which
incriminates him for an offense other than that
charged (People v. Ayson, G.R. No. 85215 (1989))
NOTICE AND HEARING
• General Rule: Required under Bk. VII, Admin. Code in the
following instances:

• Contested cases (Sec. 3)

• Insofar as practicable, to certain licensing procedures,

involving grant, renewal, denial or cancellation of a
license; i.e. when the grant, renewal, denial or
cancellation of a license is required to be preceded by
notice and hearing (Sec. 17(1))

• All licensing procedures, when a license is withdrawn,

suspended, revoked or annulled (Sec. 17(2))
NOTICE AND HEARING
• Exception: Notice and hearing not required in
cases of:
• (a) willful violation of pertinent laws, rules and
regulations or
• (b) when public security, health, or safety require
otherwise (Sec. 17(2))
NOTICE AND HEARING
• When required:
• When the law specifically requires it
• When it affects a person’s status and liberty
NOTICE AND HEARING
• When not required

• Urgent reasons

• Discretion is exercised by an officer vested with it upon an

undisputed fact (Suntay v. People, G.R. No. L-9430 (1957))

• If it involves the exercise of discretion and there is no grave

abuse

• When it involves rules to govern future conduct of persons or

enterprises, unless law provides otherwise

• In the valid exercise of police power

JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF
SUFFICIENCY OF STANDARDS
• Interest of law and order (Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro, G.R.
No. 14078 (1919))

• Public interest (People v. Rosenthal, G.R. Nos. 46076 & 46077 (1939))

• What is moral, educational, or amusing (Mutual Film Corp v.

Industrial Commission of Ohio, 236 U.S. 230 (1914))

• Justice and equity (Antamok Goldfields v. CIR, G.R. No. 46892 (1940))

• Public convenience and welfare (Calalang v. Williams, G.R. No. 47800

(1940))

• Simplicity, economy and efficiency (Cervantes v. Auditor General, G.R.

No. L-4043, (1952))
JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF
SUFFICIENCY OF STANDARDS
• National security (Hirabayashi v. United States, 320
U.S. 99 (1943))
• What is sacrilegious (Burstyn v. Wilson, 343 U.S. 495
(1952))
• Adequate and efficient instruction (PACU v. Secretary of
Education, G.R. No. L-5279 (1955))
• Maintain monetary stability, promote rising level of
production, and real income (People v. Jolliffe, G.R. No.
L-9553 (1959))
BINDING EFFECT OF ADMINISTRATIVE
DECISIONS ON COURTS

• Article 8 of the Civil Code recognizes judicial

decisions, applying or interpreting statutes as
part of the legal system of the country. But
administrative decisions do not enjoy that level of
recognition. A memorandum- circular of a bureau
head could not operate to vest a taxpayer with a
shield against judicial action (Philippine Bank of
Communications v. CIR, G.R. No. 112024 (1999))
ADMINISTRATIVE RES
JUDICATA
• The doctrine of res judicata applies only to judicial
or quasi-judicial proceedings and not to the
exercise of purely administrative functions.
Administrative proceedings are non-litigious and
summary in nature; hence, res judicata does not
apply (Nasipit Lumber Co. v. NLRC, G.R. No.
54424 (1989))
ADMINISTRATIVE RES
JUDICATA
• Requisites
• The former judgment must be final;
• It must have been rendered by a court having
jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties;
• It must be a judgment on the merits; and
• There must be identity of parties, subject matter and
cause of action (Ipekdijan Merchandising v. CTA,
G.R. No. L-14791 (1963))
ADMINISTRATIVE RES
JUDICATA
• Effect: Decisions and orders of administrative
bodies rendered pursuant to their quasi-judicial
authority have, upon their finality, the force and
effect of a final judgment within the purview of
the doctrine of res judicata, which forbids the
reopening of matters once judicially determined
by competent authorities
FORUM SHOPPING

• There is forum-shopping whenever, as a result of an adverse

opinion in one forum, a party seeks a favorable opinion (other
than by appeal or certiorari) in another. The principle applies
not only with respect to suits filed in the courts but also in
connection with litigation commenced in the courts while an
administrative proceeding is pending, in order to defeat
administrative processes and in anticipation of an unfavorable
administrative ruling and a favorable court ruling

• The test for determining whether a party has violated the rule
against forum shopping is where a final judgment in one case
will amount to res judicata in the action under consideration
(Fortich v. Corona, G.R. No. 131457 (1998), citing First
Philippine International Bank v. CA, G.R. No. 115849 (1996))
THE CIVIL SERVICE
SCOPE
• Embraces all instrumentalities and agencies of the
Government, including government-owned and controlled
corporations with original charters (Sec. 2(1), Art. IX-B, 1987
Const.)

• As the central personnel agency of the government, the CSC

has broad authority to pass upon all civil service matters. The
mandate of the CSC should therefore be read as the
comprehensive authority to perform all functions necessary to
ensure the efficient administration of the entire civil service,
including the Central Executive Service (CES). Further, the
specific powers of the CESB must be narrowly interpreted as
exceptions to the comprehensive authority granted to the CSC
by the Constitution and relevant statutes (Career Executive
Service Board v. CSC, G.R. No. 197762 (2017))
JURISDICTION OF
THE CIVIL SERVICE
COMMISSION
EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION
• Disciplinary cases
• Cases involving “personnel action” affecting the
Civil Service employees (i.e., appointment through
certification, promotion, transfer, reinstatement,
reemployment, detail, reassignment, demotion,
separation)
• Employment status
• Qualification standards
EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION
• As to the power of the CSC to review an appointee’s
qualifications, the only function of the CSC is to review
the appointment in the light of the requirements of the
Civil Service Law (Lapinid v. CSC, G.R. No. 96298
(1991))
• The CSC’s rule-making power, albeit constitutionally
granted, is still limited to the implementation and
interpretation of the laws it is tasked to enforce. Thus,
a law which exempts an agency from rules on position
classification cannot be overridden by a CSC
Memorandum Circular (TIDCORP v. CSC, G.R. No.
182249 (2013))
LIMITATIONS
• The authority of city or municipal mayors to
exercise administrative supervision over
city/municipal civil registrars is not exclusive, but
concurrent with the CSC
• The CSC, as the central personnel agency of the
government, has the power to appoint and discipline
its officials and employees and to hear and decide
administrative cases instituted by or brought before
it directly or on appeal (Mamiscal v. Abdullah, A.M.
No. SCC-13-18-J (2015))
COMMISSION ON AUDIT
POWERS AND FUNCTIONS
• The Commission has the power, authority and duty
to examine, audit and settle all accounts pertaining
to the revenue and receipts of and expenditures or
uses of the funds and properties of the Philippine
government.
• Towards that end, it has the exclusive authority to
define the scope, techniques and methods of its
auditing and examination procedures. It also may
prevent and disallow irregular, unnecessary,
excessive, extravagant or unconscionable
expenditures, or uses of government funds and
properties (Sec. 2(2), Art. IX-D, 1987 Const.)
POWERS AND FUNCTIONS
• No law shall be passed exempting any entity
of the Government or its subsidiaries in any
guise whatever, or any investment of public
funds, from the jurisdiction of the
Commission on Audit (Sec. 3, Art. IX-D, 1987
Const.)
JURISDICTION
• Jurisdiction includes, but is not limited to, the following:

• Disallowance of expenditures or uses of government funds and properties

found to be illegal, irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant or
unconscionable;

• Money claims due from or owing to any government agency;

• Determination of policies, promulgation of rules and regulations, and

prescription of standards governing the performance by the Commission of
its powers and functions;

• Resolution of novel, controversial, complicated or difficult questions of law

relating to government accounting and auditing;

• Charges made in the audit of revenues and receipts resulting from under-
appraisal, under-assessment or under-collection;
JURISDICTION
• Jurisdiction includes, but is not limited to, the following:

• Audit of the books, records and accounts of public utilities as provided by law;

• Visitorial power over non-governmental organizations (1) subsidized by the

government, (2) those required to pay levies or government share, (3) those
funded by donations through the government, (4) those for which government
has put up a counterpart fund, or (5) those entrusted with government funds
or properties;

• Authorization and enforcement of the settlement of accounts subsisting

between agencies of the government;

• Compromise or release in whole or in part, of any settled claim or liability to

any government agency;

• Power to require the submission of papers relative to government obligations;

JURISDICTION
• Jurisdiction includes, but is not limited to, the following:

• Opening and revision of settled accounts;

• Retention of money due to a person for satisfaction of his indebtedness to the

government;

• Seizure by the Auditor of the office of the local treasurer found to have a shortage in
cash;

• Checking and audit of all property or supplies of the government agency;

• Constructive distraint of property of any accountable officer with shortage in his

accounts upon a finding of a prima facie case of malversation of public funds or
property against him;

• In coordination with appropriate legal bodies, collection of indebtedness found to be

due a government agency in the settlement and adjustment of its accounts by the
Commission (2009 Revised Rules of Procedure of the Commission on Audit)
FREEDOM OF
INFORMATION LAWS
CONSTITUTION
• The State adopts and implements a policy of full public
disclosure of all its transactions involving public
interest, subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by
law (Sec. 28, Art. II, 1987 Const.)
• The right of the people to information on matters of
public concern shall be recognized. Access to official
records, and to documents and papers pertaining to
official acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as to
government research data used as basis for policy
development, shall be afforded the citizen, subject to
such limitations as may be provided by law. (Sec. 7,
Art. III, 1987 Const.)
DATA PRIVACY ACT
POLICY
• To protect the fundamental human right of
privacy, of communication while ensuring free
flow of information to promote innovation and
growth
• In recognition of the vital role of information and
communications technology in nation-building and
its inherent obligation to ensure that personal
information in information and communications
systems in the government and in the private
sector are secured and protected
PERSONAL INFORMATION
• Any information whether recorded in a material
form or not, from which the identity of an
individual is apparent or can be reasonably and
directly ascertained by the entity holding the
information, or when put together with other
information would directly and certainly identify
an individual (Sec. 3(g), R.A. 10173)
SENSITIVE PERSONAL
INFORMATION
• Refers to personal information:

• About an individual’s race, ethnic origin, marital status, age, color, and
religious, philosophical or political affiliations;

• About an individual’s health, education, genetic or sexual life of a person,

or to any proceeding for any offense committed or alleged to have been
committed by such person, the disposal of such proceedings, or the sentence
of any court in such proceedings;

• Issued by government agencies peculiar to an individual which includes,

but not limited to, social security numbers, previous or current health
records, licenses or its denials, suspension or revocation, and tax returns;
and

• Specifically established by an executive order or an act of Congress to be

kept classified (Sec. 3(l), R.A. 10173)
PRIVILEGED PERSONAL
INFORMATION
• Any and all forms of data which under the Rules
of Court and other pertinent laws constitute
privileged communication
SCOPE
• Processing of all types of personal information
• Any natural and juridical person involved in
personal information processing
• Including those personal information controllers and
processors who, although not found or established in
the Philippines, use equipment that are located in
the Philippines, or those who maintain an office,
branch or agency in the Philippines (Sec. 4, R.A.
10173)
PERSONAL INFORMATION
CONTROLLER
• A person or organization who controls the collection, holding,
processing or use of personal information, including a person or
organization who instructs another person or organization to
collect, hold, process, use, transfer or disclose personal
information on his or her behalf. The term excludes:

• (1) A person or organization who performs such functions as

instructed by another person or organization; and

• (2) An individual who collects, holds, processes or uses

personal information in connection with the individual’s
personal, family or household affairs (Sec. 3(h), R.A.10173)
PERSONAL INFORMATION
CONTROLLER
• May be located outside the Philippines

• For the extra-territorial application of the law to operate, the PIC

must be engaged in the processing of the personal data of a Filipino
citizen, or at least a resident of the Philippines, and it should have an
established link to the country

• Primary responsibility: Securing the personal data under its control

or custody, even when these are transferred across borders or
jurisdictions

• Ensures that said data are processed in accordance with the

provisions of the DPA, its IRR, and other applicable issuances of the
NPC. Any outsourcing, subcontracting, or data sharing agreement
that facilitates such cross-border transfer shall also be subject to the
requirements of the law
PERSONAL INFORMATION
PROCESSOR
• Any natural or juridical person qualified to act as
such under this Act to whom a personal
information controller may outsource the
processing of personal data pertaining to a data
subject (Sec.3(i), R.A.10173)
• Processing of personal information is any
operation where personal information is involved
(Sec. 3(j), R.A. 10173)
DATA SUBJECT
• Data Privacy Act: An individual whose
personal information is processed
• IRR: An individual whose personal, sensitive
personal, or privileged information is
processed
• NPC: Natural person
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
• Personal information must be:

• Collected for specified and legitimate purposes determined and

declared before, or as soon as reasonably practicable after collection,
and later processed in a way compatible with such declared, specified
and legitimate purposes only

• Processed fairly and lawfully

• Accurate, relevant and, where necessary for purposes for which it is to

be used the processing of personal information, kept up to date;
inaccurate or incomplete data must be rectified, supplemented,
destroyed or their further processing restricted

• Adequate and not excessive in relation to the purposes for which they
are collected and processed
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
• General Rule: The processing of personal
information shall be allowed, subject to
compliance with the requirements of this Act and
other laws allowing disclosure of information to
the public and adherence to the principles of
transparency, legitimate purpose and
proportionality (Sec. 6, R.A.10173)
• Exception: sensitive personal information and
privileged information (Sec.13, R.A. 10173)
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
• Exceptions to the Exception:

• The data subject has given his or her consent, specific to the purpose
prior to the processing, or in the case of privileged information, all
parties to the exchange have given their consent prior to processing

• The processing of the same is provided for by existing laws and

regulations: Provided, That such regulatory enactments guarantee the
protection of the sensitive personal information and the privileged
information: Provided, further, That the consent of the data subjects
are not required by law or regulation permitting the processing of the
sensitive personal information or the privileged information

• The processing is necessary to protect the life and health of the data
subject or another person, and the data subject is not legally or
physically able to express his or her consent prior to the processing
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
• Personal information must be:

• Retained only for as long as necessary for the fulfillment of the purposes for
which the data was obtained or for the establishment, exercise or defense of
legal claims, or for legitimate business purposes, or as provided by law

• Kept in a form which permits identification of data subjects for no longer than
is necessary for the purposes for which the data were collected and processed

• Provided, That personal information collected for other purposes may lie
processed for historical, statistical or scientific purposes, and in cases laid
down in law may be stored for longer periods

• Provided, further, That adequate safeguards are guaranteed by said laws

authorizing their processing (Sec. 6, R.A. 10173)
CONSENT
• Agreement to the collection and processing of personal information
about and/or relating to him or her

• May be evidenced by written, electronic, or recorded means

• Freely given, specific, and informed

• Implied, implicit or negative consent is not recognized (Sec. 3(b), R.A.

10173)

• A company policy that merely stipulates that the inputting of

requested personal information amounts to consent or a waiver by a
data subject of his or her data privacy rights shall not be considered
as valid consent
RIGHTS
• Right to information

• Right to access

• Right to object

• Rights to erasure or blocking

• Right to damages

• Right to file a complaint

• Rights to rectify

• Right to data portability (Sec. 16, R.A. 10173)

RIGHT TO INFORMATION
• Description of the personal information to be entered into the system

• Purposes for which they are being or are to be processed

• Scope and method of the personal information processing

• The recipients or classes of recipients to whom they are or may be disclosed

• Methods utilized for automated access, if the same is allowed by the data subject, and the
extent to which such access is authorized

• The identity and contact details of the personal information controller or its representative

• The period for which the information will be stored

• The existence of their rights, i.e., to access, correction, as well as the right to lodge a
complaint before the Commission
CREDIT VERIFICATION
• Upon application, applicants should be informed
when their personal data will be verified with
specific government databases and that only
information relevant and necessary to the
attainment of the purpose of processing will be
collected, used and stored for verification purposes
RIGHT TO ACCESS
• Contents of his or her personal information that were processed

• Sources from which personal information were obtained

• Names and addresses of recipients of the personal information

• Manner by which such data were processed

• Reasons for the disclosure of the personal information to recipients

• Information on automated processes where the data will or likely to be made as the sole basis for
any decision significantly affecting or will affect the data subject

• Date when his or her personal information concerning the data subject were last accessed and
modified

• The designation, or name or identity and address of the personal information controller

• Silent on fees, but EU GDPR: reasonable fee based on administrative cost for further copies
RIGHT TO OBJECT
• Direct marketing purposes
• Profiling purposes (profiling: processing of
personal data consisting of the use of personal
data to evaluate certain personal aspects relating
to a natural person, in particular to analyze or
predict aspects concerning that person's
performance at work, economic situation, health,
personal preferences, interests, reliability,
behavior, location or movements) – information
that processing is automated
• Automated processing purposes
RIGHT TO ERASURE OR
BLOCKING
• Upon discovery and substantial proof that the
personal information are incomplete, outdated,
false, unlawfully obtained, used for unauthorized
purposes or are no longer necessary for the
purposes for which they were collected
• No distinction or qualification is made as to where
(i.e., online site/platform vs. systems backup) the
deletion (or conversely, retention) shall apply or
refer to (AO2017-001)
RIGHT TO DAMAGES
• Sustained due to such inaccurate, incomplete,
outdated, false, unlawfully obtained or
unauthorized use of personal information
RIGHT TO FILE A
COMPLAINT
• The NPC can receive complaints, institute
investigations, facilitate or enable settlement
of complaints through the use of alternative
dispute resolution processes, adjudicate,
award indemnity on matters affecting any
personal information
RIGHT TO RECTIFY
• Dispute the inaccuracy or error in the personal
information and have the personal information
controller correct it immediately and accordingly,
unless the request is vexatious or otherwise
unreasonable—
• Corrected, the personal information controller shall
ensure the accessibility of both the new and the
retracted information and the simultaneous receipt
of the new and the retracted information by
recipients
RIGHT TO DATA
PORTABILITY
• Right to data portability: obtain from the personal
information controller a copy of data undergoing
processing in an electronic or structured format,
which is commonly used and allows for further
use by the data subject
DATA PROTECTION
OFFICER
• While a non-resident individual may be assigned as a DPO, note
that each entity that forms part of a group of companies is
treated separately and is considered as a PIC or PIP in its own
right. Thus, each PIC or PIP must designate a DPO as
prescribed by law.

• In addition, while a group of related companies may appoint or

designate the DPO of one of its members to be primarily
accountable for ensuring the compliance of the entire group
with all data protection policies, such appointment is still
subject to the approval of the NPC and, if so allowed, the other
members of the group must still designate a Compliance Officer
for Privacy (COP)
SECURITY OF SENSITIVE PERSONAL
INFORMATION IN GOVERNMENT
• All sensitive personal information maintained by the
government, its agencies and instrumentalities shall be
secured, as far as practicable, with the use of the most
appropriate standard recognized by the information and
communications technology industry, and as
recommended by the Commission. The head of each
government agency or instrumentality shall be responsible
for complying with the security requirements mentioned
herein while the Commission shall monitor the compliance
and may recommend the necessary action in order to
satisfy the minimum standards (Sec. 22, R.A. 10173)
REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO ACCESS
BY AGENCY PERSONNEL TO SENSITIVE
PERSONAL INFORMATION

• If On-site and Online Access – Except as may be

allowed through guidelines to be issued by the
Commission, no employee of the government shall
have access to sensitive personal information on
government property or through online facilities
unless the employee has received a security
clearance from the head of the source agency
REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO ACCESS
BY AGENCY PERSONNEL TO SENSITIVE
PERSONAL INFORMATION
• If Off-site Access – Unless otherwise provided in guidelines to be issued by the
Commission, sensitive personal information maintained by an agency may not be
transported or accessed from a location off government property unless a request for such
transportation or access is submitted and approved by the head of the agency in accordance
with the following guidelines:

• Deadline for Approval or Disapproval – In the case of any request submitted to the head
of an agency, such head of the agency shall approve or disapprove the request within two
(2) business days after the date of submission of the request. In case there is no action by
the head of the agency, then such request is considered disapproved

• Limitation to One thousand (1,000) Records – If a request is approved, the head of the
agency shall limit the access to not more than 1,000 records at a time

• Encryption – Any technology used to store, transport or access sensitive personal

information for purposes of off-site access approved under this subsection shall be
secured by the use of the most secure encryption standard recognized by the Commission
PROCEDURE
1. Filing of Complaint 7. Investigation; Examination
of Systems and Procedures
2. Evaluation
8. Failure to Submit Comment
3. Outright Dismissal
9. Recommendation of the
4. Order to Confer for Investigating Officer
Discovery
10. Temporary Ban on
5. Discovery Processing/Permanent Ban

6. Order to Submit Comment 11. Action on Recommendation

12. Decision
OFFENSES
• Unauthorized Processing of Personal Information and Sensitive Personal Information (Sec.
25, R.A. 10173)

• Accessing Personal Information and Sensitive Personal Information Due to Negligence

(Sec. 26, R.A. 10173)

• Improper Disposal of Personal Information and Sensitive Personal Information (Sec. 27,
R.A. 10173)

• Processing of Personal Information and Sensitive Personal Information for Unauthorized

Purposes (Sec. 28, R.A. 10173)

• Unauthorized Access or Intentional Breach (Sec. 29, R.A. 10173)

• Concealment of Security Breaches Involving Sensitive Personal Information (Sec. 30, R.A.
10173)

• Malicious Disclosure (Sec. 31, R.A. 10173)

• Unauthorized Disclosure (Sec. 32, R.A. 10173)

WHEN OFFENDER IS
PUBLIC OFFICER
• When the offender or the person responsible for
the offense is a public officer as defined in the
Administrative Code of the Philippines in the
exercise of his or her duties, an accessory penalty
consisting in the disqualification to occupy public
office for a term double the term of criminal
penalty imposed shall he applied (Sec. 36, R.A.
10173)
DATA MINING
• Techniques used to extract intelligence from vast
stores of digital information
• Facebook’s estimates: Philippines ranked the
second highest (1,175,870) next to the United
States (70,632,350), followed by Indonesia
(1,096,666), then the United Kingdom (1,079,031)
as the most affected by Cambridge Analytica’s
data mining operations
DATA MINING
• Websites use cookies both to offer a personalized
experience to users and to track online behavior and usage
patterns in order to tailor online ads to groups of users
based on demographics or likely purchasing behavior

• Information can include the searches that users have run,

their browsing patterns while visiting a site, and their
"clickstream" behavior (that is, what links they clicked on
while browsing the web)"

• Third-party ad-serving companies use cookies to compile

information about users' online behavior as they visit
multiple sites that rely on the same ad network to deliver
targeted ads
WHAT’S THE ISSUE WITH
DATA MINING?
• While third-party apps on Facebook need your
consent to access your data, the app not be
necessarily transparent where these will be used.
These apps may come in the form of interesting
personality quizzes
WHAT CAN BE DONE
ABOUT DATA MINING?
• Users can ensure companies and app makers don't
continue to mine them for data by taking their
apps off your approved list or reducing what data
these app makers allowed to have
EXECUTIVE ORDER NO.
2, SERIES OF 2016
INFORMATION
• Any records, documents, papers, reports, letters,
contracts, minutes and transcripts of official meetings,
maps, books, photographs, data, research materials,
films, sound and video recording, magnetic or other
tapes, electronic data, computer stored data, any other
like or similar data or materials recorded, stored or
archived in whatever format, whether offline or online,
which are made, received, or kept in or under the control
and custody of any government office pursuant to law,
executive order, and rules and regulations or in
connection with the performance or transaction of
official business by any government office (Sec.1, E.O. 2,
s. 2016)
RECORDS
• “Official record/records”: information produced or
received by a public officer or employee, or by a
government office in an official capacity or
pursuant to a public function or duty.
• “Public record/records”: includes information
required by laws, executive orders, rules, or
regulations to be entered, kept and made publicly
available by a government office
EXCEPTION TO ACCESS TO
INFORMATION
• When the information falls under any of the exceptions enshrined in the Constitution, existing law
or jurisprudence (Sec. 4, E.O. 2, s. 2016)

• Examples in jurisprudence:

• Privileged information rooted in separation of powers

• Information of military and diplomatic secrets

• Information affecting national and economic security

• Information on investigations of crimes by law enforcers before prosecution (Chavez v. PEA-

Amari, G.R. No. 133250 (2002))

• Trade secrets and banking transactions (Chavez v. PCGG, G.R. No. 130716 (1998))

• Offers exchanged during diplomatic negotiations (Akbayan v. Aquino, G.R. No. 170516 (2008))

• Other confidential matters (i.e. RA 6713, closed door Cabinet meetings, executive sessions, or
internal deliberations in the Supreme Court) (Chavez v. PCGG, supra)
PROTECTION OF PRIVACY
• While providing access to information, public records, and official records,
responsible officials shall afford full protection to the right to privacy of the
individual as follows:

• Each government office shall ensure that personal information in its custody or
under its control is disclosed or released only if it is material or relevant to the
subject-matter of the request and its disclosure is permissible under this order
or existing law, rules or regulations

• Each government office must protect personal information in its custody or

control by making reasonable security arrangements against leaks or premature
disclosure of personal information which unduly exposes the individual whose
personal information is requested, to vilification, harassment or any other
wrongful acts

• Any employee, official or director of a government office who has access,

authorized or unauthorized, to personal information in the custody of the office,
must not disclose that information except when authorized under this order or
pursuant to existing laws, rules or regulation (Sec. 7, E.O. 2, s. 2016)
PROCEDURE FOR REQUEST OF
ACCESS
• Written request to the government office concerned, stating: name and contact information,
valid proof of his identification or authorization, description of information requested, reason
for request

• Free, reasonable assistance to enable requesting parties to comply with the requirements

• Stamping by the government office, indicating the date and time of receipt and the name, rank,
title and position of the receiving public officer or employee with the corresponding signature,
and a copy furnished to the requester

• Each government office shall establish a system to trace the status of all requests for
information received by it

• Response as soon as practicable but not exceeding 15 working days from the receipt

• Period to respond may be extended whenever the information requested requires extensive
search of the government office’s records facilities, examination of voluminous records, the
occurrence of fortuitous cases or other analogous cases. The government office shall notify
the requester of the extension, setting forth the reasons. In no case shall the extension go
beyond 20 working days unless exceptional circumstances warrant a longer period

• Once request is granted, the requester shall be notified and directed to pay any applicable fees
FOI MANUAL
• Every government office is directed to prepare its own People’s FOI Manual, which shall
include among others the following provisions:

• The location and contact information of the head, regional, provincial, and field offices,
and other established places where the public can obtain information or submit
requests

• The person or office responsible for receiving requests for information

• The procedure for the filing and processing of the request

• The standard forms for the submission of requests and for the proper acknowledgment
of requests

• The process for the disposition of requests

• The procedure for the administrative appeal of any denial for access to informatioN

• The schedule of applicable fees (Sec. 12, E.O. 2, s. 2016)

KEEPING RECORDS
• Subject to existing laws, rules, and regulations,
government offices shall create and/or maintain
accurate and reasonably complete records of
important information in appropriate formats,
and implement a records management system
that facilitates easy identification, retrieval and
communication of information to the public (Sec.
14, E.O. 2, s. 2016)
ADMINISTRATIVE
LIABILITY
• Failure to comply with the provisions of this
Order may be a ground for administrative and
disciplinary sanctions against any erring public
officer or employee as provided under existing
laws or regulations (Sec. 15, E.O. 2, s. 2016)
EASE OF DOING
BUSINESS
POLICY
• To promote integrity, accountability, proper management of
public affairs and public property as well as to establish
effective practices, aimed at efficient turnaround of the
delivery of government services and the prevention of graft
and corruption in the government

• Towards this end, the State shall maintain honesty and

responsibility among its public officials and employees, and
shall take appropriate measures to promote transparency in
each agency with regard to the manner of transacting with the
public, which shall encompass a program for the adoption of
simplified requirements and procedures that will reduce red
tape and expedite business and nonbusiness related
transactions in government (Sec. 2, R.A. 11032)
COVERAGE
• This Act shall apply to all government offices and
agencies including local government units (LGUs),
government-owned or controlled corporations and other
government instrumentalities, whether located in the
Philippines or abroad, that provide services covering
business and nonbusiness related transactions as
defined in this Act (Sec. 3, R.A. 11032)
DUTIES
DUTIES UNDER EASE OF
DOING BUSINESS ACT
• Reengineering of systems and procedures
• Citizen’s Charter
• Zero-Contact Policy
• Accountability of heads of offices and agencies
• Accessing government services
• Prescribed Processing Time & Automatic
Approval
CITIZEN’S CHARTER
• All government agencies shall set up a current and updated Citizen’s Charter in the
form of information billboards near the main entrance of offices at the most
conspicuous place to indicate in detail:

• A comprehensive and uniform checklist of requirements for each type of

application or request

• The procedure to obtain a particular service

• The person/s responsible for each step

• The maximum time to conclude the process

• The document/s to be presented by the applicant or requesting party, if necessary

• The amount of fees, if necessary

• The procedure for filing complaints (Sec. 6, R.A. 11032)

ZERO-CONTACT POLICY
• Except during the preliminary assessment of the request
and evaluation of sufficiency of submitted requirements,
no government officer or employee shall have any
contact, in any manner, unless strictly necessary with
any applicant or requesting party concerning an
application or request.
• Once the DICT has completed a web-based software
enabled business registration system, all
transactions shall be coursed through such system
(Sec. 7, R.A. 11032)
ACCESSING GOVERNMENT
SERVICES
• The following shall be adopted by all government offices and agencies:

• Acceptance of applications or requests

• Action of offices

• Denial of application or request for access to government service

• Limitation of signatories

• Electronic versions of licenses, clearances, permits, certifications, or

authorizations

• Adoption of working schedules to serve applicants or requesting parties

• Identification card

• Establishment of Public Assistance/Complaints Desk

PRESCRIBED PROCESSING
TIME
• All government agencies, national or local, GOCCs,
and government instrumentalities located in the
Philippines or abroad shall comply with prescribed
processing time as follows:
• 3 working days for simple transactions
• 7 working days for complex transactions
• 20 working days for highly technical transactions
(Sec. 9(b), R.A. 11032)
AUTOMATIC APPROVAL
• In case an agency fails to approve or disapprove
an original application within the prescribed
processing time, the said application shall be
deemed approved (Sec. 10, R.A. 11032)
ANTI-RED TAPE
AUTHORITY
• The Anti-Red Tape Authority, attached to the Office of the President,
shall have, among others, the following powers and functions:

• Monitor and evaluate the compliance of agencies, and issue notice

of warning to erring and/or noncomplying government employees
or officials

• Initiate investigation, motu proprio or upon receipt of a complaint,

refer the same to the appropriate agency, or file cases for violations
of this Act

• Assist complaints in filing necessary cases with the CSC, the

Ombudsman, and other appropriate courts, as the case may be
(Sec. 17, R.A. 11032)
LIABILITIES
VIOLATIONS AND PERSONS
LIABLE
• Any person who performs or causes the performance of the following acts shall be liable:

• Refusal to accept application or request with complete requirements being submitted by an

applicant or requesting party without due cause

• Imposition of additional requirements other than those listed in the Citizen’s Charter

• Imposition of additional costs not reflected in the Citizen’s Charter

• Failure to give the applicant or requesting party a written notice on the disapproval of an
application or request;

• Failure to render government services within the prescribed processing time on any
application or request without due cause;

• Failure to attend to applicants or requesting parties who are within the premises of the office
or agency concerned prior to the end of official working hours and during lunch break;

• Failure or refusal to issue official receipts; and

• Fixing and/or collusion with fixers in consideration of economic and/or other gain or
advantage.
PENALTIES AND LIABILITIES
• Any violations of the preceding actions will warrant the following penalties and
liabilities:

• First Offense: Administrative liability with 6 months suspension: Provided,

however, That in the case of fixing and/or collusion with fixers under Sec. 21(h),
the penalty and liability under Sec. 22(b) of this Act shall apply.

• Second Offense: Administrative liability and criminal liability of dismissal from

the service, perpetual disqualification from holding public office and forfeiture
of retirement benefits and imprisonment of 1 year to 6 years with a fine of not
less than P500,000.00, but not more than P2,000,000.00

• Criminal liability shall also be incurred through the commission of bribery,

extortion, or when the violation was done deliberately and maliciously to solicit
favor in cash or in kind. In such cases, the pertinent provisions of the RPC and
other special laws shall apply
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF
ADMINISTRATIVE
DECISIONS
JUDICIAL RECOURSE AND
REVIEW
• General Rule: Judicial review may be granted or withheld as Congress
chooses. Thus, a law may provide that the decision of an administrative
agency shall be final and not reviewable and it would still not offend due
process

• Exception: The Constitution provides otherwise

• E.g., grave abuse of discretion (Sec. 1(2), Art. VIII, 1987 Const.)

• There is an underlying power in the courts to scrutinize the acts of

agencies on questions of law and jurisdiction even though no right of
review is given by statute … Judicial review is proper in case of lack of
jurisdiction, grave abuse of discretion, error of law, fraud or collusion
(San Miguel Corp. v. NLRC, G.R. No. L-39195 (1975), citing Timbancaya
v. Vicente, G.R. No. L-19100 (1963))
JUDICIAL RECOURSE AND
REVIEW
• Rationale:

• There is an underlying power of the courts to scrutinize the

acts of such agencies on questions of law and jurisdiction
even though no right of review is given by statute

• The purpose of judicial review is to keep the administrative

agency within its jurisdiction and protect the substantial
rights of the parties

• It is that part of the checks and balances which restricts the

separation of powers and forestalls arbitrary and unjust
adjudications (St. Martin’s Funeral Homes v. NLRC, G.R.
No. 130866 (1998))
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF
ADMINISTRATIVE
DECISIONS
EXTENT OF JUDICIAL
REVIEW
• Constitutionality of the law creating the agency
and granting it powers
• Validity of agency action if these transcend limits
established by law
• Correctness of interpretation or application of the
law
QUESTIONS OF FACT
• Sec. 25(5), Bk. VII, Admin. Code. Judicial
Review.
• Review shall be made on the basis of the
record taken as a whole. The findings of fact
of the agency when supported by
substantial evidence shall be final except
when specifically provided otherwise by law.
QUESTIONS OF FACT
• General Rule: Findings of fact by the agency are final when supported by
substantial evidence

• Exceptions:

• Specifically allowed otherwise by law

• Fraud, imposition, or mistake other error of judgment in evaluating the

evidence (Ortua v. Singson Encarnacion, G.R. No. L-39919 (1934))

• Error in appreciation of pleadings and interpretation of the documentary

evidence presented by the parties (Tan Tiong Teck v. SEC, G.R. No. L-
46471 (1940))

• Decision of the agency was rendered by an almost divided agency and

that the division was precisely on the facts as borne out by the evidence
(Gonzales v. Victory Labor Union, G.R. No. L-2256 (1969))
QUESTIONS OF
DISCRETION
• When a matter has been committed to agency
discretion, courts are reluctant to disturb
agency action on it. But a party may get a
court to intervene against arbitrary action
and grave abuse of discretion (Cortes)
MODES OF JUDICIAL
REVIEW
MODES OF JUDICIAL
REVIEW
• Certiorari
• Prohibition
• Mandamus
• Declaratory Relief
• Habeas Corpus
• Injunction as Provisional Remedy
DOCTRINE OF
PRIMARY
JURISDICTION
RULE
• Courts will not intervene if the question to be resolved is one
which requires the expertise of administrative agencies and the
legislative intent on the matter is to have uniformity in the
rulings (Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan, 293 U.S. 388 (1935))

• If the determination of the case requires the expertise,

specialized skills and knowledge of the proper administrative
bodies because technical matters or intricate questions of facts
are involved, then relief must first be obtained in an
administrative proceeding before a remedy will be supplied by
the courts even though the matter is within the proper
jurisdiction of a court (Industrial Enterprises, Inc. v. CA, G.R.
No. 88550 (1990))
RATIONALE
• In this era of clogged docket courts, the need for
specialized administrative boards with the special
knowledge and capability to hear and determine
promptly disputes on technical matters has
become well-nigh indispensable. Between the
power lodged in an administrative body and a
court, the unmistakable trend has been to refer it
to the former (GMA v. ABS CBN, G.R. No. 160703
(2005))
REQUISITES
• An administrative body and a regular court have
concurrent and original jurisdiction
• Question to be resolved requires expertise of
administrative agency
• Legislative intent on the matter is to have
uniformity in rulings
• Administrative agency is performing a quasi-
judicial or adjudicatory function (not rule-making
or quasi-legislative function (Smart v. NTC, G.R.
No. 151908 (2003))
WHEN DOCTRINE
INAPPLICABLE
• If the agency does not have exclusive (original)
jurisdiction
• When the issue is not within the competence of the
administrative body to act on, such as the validity or
constitutionality of a rule or regulation issued by the
administrative agency in the performance of its quasi-
legislative function (Smart v. NTC, supra)
• When the issue involved is clearly a factual question
that does not require specialized skills and knowledge
for resolution to justify the exercise of primary
jurisdiction
EFFECT
• The court suspends its action on the cases before it pending the
final outcome of the administrative proceedings (Vidad v. RTC,
G.R. No. 98084 (1993))

• All the proceedings of the court in violation of the doctrine and

all orders and decisions rendered thereby are null and void
(Province of Aklan v. Jody King Construction and Development
Corp., G.R. No. 197592 (2013))

• The court may raise the issue of primary jurisdiction sua sponte
and its invocation cannot be waived by the failure of the parties
to argue it as the doctrine exists for the proper distribution of
power between judicial and administrative bodies and not for
the convenience of the parties (Euro-Med Laboratories Phil., Inc.
v. Province of Batangas, G.R. No. 148106 (2006))
DOCTRINE OF EXHAUSTION
OF ADMINISTRATIVE
REMEDIES
GENERAL RULE
• Where the law has delineated the procedure by
which administrative appeal or remedy could be
effected, the same should be followed before
recourse to judicial action can be initiated.
(Pascual v. Provincial Board, G.R. No. L-11959
(1959))
REQUISITES
• The administrative agency is performing a
quasi-judicial function
• Judicial review is available; and
• The court acts in its appellate jurisdiction
RATIONALE
• Legal reason: The law prescribes a procedure
• Practical reason: To give the agency a chance to
correct its own errors and prevent unnecessary and
premature resort to the courts
• Reasons of comity: Expedience, courtesy, convenience
• Separation of powers: which enjoins upon the
Judiciary a becoming policy of non-interference with
matters falling primarily (albeit not exclusively)
within the competence of other departments
EXCEPTIONS
• The exceptions may be condensed into three:
• Grave abuse of discretion;
• Pure question of law; or
• No other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy
EXCEPTIONS
• Purely legal questions (Castro v. Secretary, G.R. No. 132174 (2001))

• here is grave doubt as to the availability of the administrative

remedy (Pascual v. Provincial Board, supra)

• Steps to be taken are merely matters of form. (Pascual v. Provincial

Board, supra)

• Administrative remedy not exclusive but merely cumulative or

concurrent to a judicial remedy. (Pascual v. Provincial Board, supra)

• There are circumstances indicating urgency of judicial intervention

(DAR v. Apex Investment, G.R. No. 149422 (2003))

• Rule does not provide plain, speedy, adequate remedy (Information

Technology Foundation v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 159139 (2004))
EXCEPTIONS
• Resort to exhaustion will only be oppressive and patently unreasonable (Cipriano
v. Marcelino, G.R. No. L-27793 (1972))

• Where the administrative remedy is only permissive or voluntary and not a

prerequisite to the institution of judicial proceedings (Corpus v. Cuaderno, Sr.,
G.R. No. L-17860 (1962))

• Application of the doctrine will only cause great and irreparable damage which
cannot be prevented except by taking the appropriate court action (De Lara, Jr. v.
Cloribel, G.R. No. L-21653 (1965))

• When it involves the rule-making or quasi- legislative functions of an

administrative agency (Smart v. NTC, supra)

• Administrative agency is in estoppel (Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 155832

(2010))

• Doctrine of qualified political agency (respondent is a department secretary whose

acts as an alter ego of the President bears the implied and assumed approval of the
latter) (Pagara v. CA, G.R. No. 96882 (1996))
EXCEPTIONS
• Subject of controversy is private land in land case proceedings (Soto v.
Jareno, G.R. No. L-38962 (1986))

• Violation of due process (Pagara v. CA, supra)

• Where there is unreasonable delay or official inaction that will

irretrievably prejudice the complainant (Republic v. Sandiganbayan,
supra)

• Administrative action is patently illegal amounting to lack or excess of

jurisdiction (DAR v. Apex Investment, supra)

• Resort to administrative remedy will amount to a nullification of a claim

(Paat v. CA, G.R. No. 111107 (1997))

• No administrative review provided for by law (Estrada v. CA, G.R. No.

137862 (2004))
EXCEPTIONS
• Issue of non-exhaustion of administrative remedies
rendered moot (Estrada v. CA, supra)
• When the claim involved is small
• When strong public interest is involved
• In quo warranto proceedings (Lopez v. City of Manila,
G.R. No. 127139 (1999)
• Law expressly provides for a different review procedure
(Samahang Magbubukid v. CA, G.R. No. 103953 (1999))
EFFECT OF FAILURE TO
EXHAUST
• A direct action in court without prior exhaustion of
administrative remedies, when required, is premature,
warranting its dismissal on a motion to dismiss grounded
on lack of cause of action

• Failure to observe the doctrine of exhaustion of

administrative remedies does not affect the Court’s
jurisdiction

• If not invoked at the proper time, this ground is deemed

waived and the court can take cognizance of the case and
try it (Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 112708-09
(1996)
WHEN APPEALS TO THE OFFICE
OF THE PRESIDENT REQUIRED
• A decision or order issued by a department or agency need not be
appealed to the Office of the President when there is a special law
that provides for a different mode of appeal. If the law does not
provide for a specific relief, appeals may be taken to the Office of the
President (Moran v. Office of the President, G.R. No. 192957 (2014))

• When the Office of the President itself represents a party, i.e., the
Republic, to a contract, it merely exercises a contractual right by
cancelling/revoking said agreement—a purely administrative action
which should not be considered quasi-judicial in nature

• Thus, absent the Office of the President's proper exercise of a

quasi-judicial function, the CA has no appellate jurisdiction over
the case (Narra Nickel Mining and Development Corp. v.
Redmont Consolidated Mines Corp., G.R. No. 202877 (2015))
DOCTRINE OF EXHAUSTION OF
ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES VS.
DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY JURISDICTION
DOCTRINE OF
EXHAUSTION OF DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY
ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION
REMEDIES

JURISDICTION Concurrent original jurisdiction

Appellate
OF COURT with the administrative body

GROUND FOR The court yields to the

NON-EXERCISE Exhaustion of administrative jurisdiction of the administrative
OF remedy is a condition precedent agency because of its specialized
JURISDICTION knowledges or expertise

COURT ACTION Dismiss Suspend judicial action

DOCTRINE OF FINALITY
OF ADMINISTRATIVE
ACTION
GENERAL RULE
• Courts will not interfere with the act of an
administrative agency before it has reached finality or
it has been
• E.g., Prohibition is not the proper remedy when the
enabling law itself has specifically tasked the Cabinet
to review and approve any proposed revisions of rates
of fees and charges. Petitioners should have availed of
this easy and accessible remedy instead of immediately
resorting to the judicial process (Paredes v. CA, G.R.
No. 113357 (1996))
RATIONALE
• Without a final order or decision, the power
has not been fully and finally exercised
EXCEPTIONS
• Correction of clerical errors

• Nunc pro tunc entries which cause no prejudice to any party

• Void judgments

• Whenever circumstances transpire after the finality of the decision

rendering its execution unjust and inequitable (Peña v. GSIS, G.R. No.
159520 (2006))

• After a judgment has become final, if there is evidence of an event or

circumstance which would affect or change the rights of the parties
thereto, the court should be allowed to admit evidence of such new facts
and circumstances, and thereafter suspend execution thereof and grant
relief as the new facts and circumstances warrant (Candelario v.
Cañizares, G.R. No. 17688 (1962))
ENFORCEMENT OF
AGENCY ACTIONS