Case Digest (G.R. No. 197422) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In consolidated G.R. Nos. 197422 and 197950, the Supreme Court En Banc heard two petitions filed by Representative Edcel C. Lagman (July 15, 2011) and Prospero A. Pichay, Jr. (August 22, 2011) against the Executive Secretary, the Secretary of Budget and Management, and the newly created Governance Commission for GOCCs. Both challenged Republic Act No. 10149 (the GOCC Governance Act) signed into law on June 6, 2011, which established a central oversight body attached to the Office of the President empowered to evaluate, reorganize, merge, streamline, abolish, or privatize government-owned or controlled corporations, shorten incumbent directors’ terms to one year, impose a June 30, 2011 cut-off for existing GOCC CEOs and board members, and design a unified compensation and position classification system. Lagman alleged violations of security of tenure (Art. IX-B, Sec. 2(3)), undue delegation of legislative power, and encroachment on the Civil Service Commission. Pichay claimed sim Case Digest (G.R. No. 197422) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Parties and Procedural History
- Petitioner Edcel C. Lagman filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition (G.R. No. 197422) on July 15, 2011, challenging Republic Act No. 10149 (“GOCC Governance Act”).
- Petitioner Prospero A. Pichay, Jr. filed a similar Petition (G.R. No. 197950) on August 22, 2011.
- The two cases were consolidated on February 7, 2012; petitioners filed memoranda, and respondents (Governance Commission for GOCCs, Executive Secretary, DBM Secretary) filed a consolidated memorandum.
- Legislative and Factual Background
- Congressional inquiries uncovered excessive bonuses, generous retirement schemes, and mounting debts in GOCCs, draining public finances.
- RA 10149 was enacted on June 6, 2011 to promote fiscal discipline, optimize State ownership rights, and align GOCC operations with national development policies.
- The law created the Governance Commission attached to the Office of the President, empowered to evaluate GOCC relevance and performance, reorganize, merge, streamline, abolish or privatize GOCCs, and supervise compensation systems.
- Constitutional Claims
- Petitioners alleged violations of:
- Security of tenure of GOCC officials (fixed terms shortened);
- Undue delegation of legislative power to the Governance Commission;
- Supplanting jurisdiction of the Civil Service Commission;
- Equal protection (arbitrary exclusions);
- Invalid repeal of special GOCC charters by a general law.
Issues:
- Justiciability and Procedural Questions
- Whether an actual case or controversy exists and petitioners have standing.
- Whether direct resort to the Supreme Court violates the hierarchy of courts.
- Substantive Constitutional Questions
- Whether RA 10149 unduly delegates legislative power.
- Whether it violates security of tenure (Art. IX-B, Sec. 2(3)).
- Whether the Governance Commission supersedes the Civil Service Commission’s jurisdiction.
- Whether exclusions from the law violate the equal protection clause.
- Whether RA 10149, a general law, validly repeals special GOCC charters.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)