Case Digest (G.R. No. 221553)
Facts:
In Pichay v. Ochoa, petitioner Prospero A. Pichay, Jr., Chairman of the Local Water Utilities Administration, sought certiorari and prohibition with a prayer for a temporary restraining order to declare Executive Order No. 13 (E.O. 13) unconstitutional. E.O. 13, issued by President Benigno S. Aquino III on November 15, 2010, abolished the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission (PAGC) created under Executive Order No. 12 (April 16, 2001) and transferred its investigative, adjudicatory, and recommendatory functions to the newly formed Investigative and Adjudicatory Division (IAD) of the Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary for Legal Affairs (ODESLA). On April 6, 2011, respondent Secretary of Finance Cesar V. Purisima filed a grave-misconduct complaint against petitioner and other LWUA trustees before the IAD-ODESLA, arising from a stock-purchase transaction. On April 14, 2011, Executive Secretary Paquito N. Ochoa, Jr. ordered written explanations under oath. Petitioner moved to diCase Digest (G.R. No. 221553)
Facts:
- Creation and abolition of the PAGC
- On April 16, 2001, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued Executive Order No. 12 creating the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission (PAGC), a collegial body empowered to investigate or hear administrative cases against all presidential appointees and submit factual findings, legal conclusions and recommended penalties to the President.
- On November 15, 2010, President Benigno S. Aquino III issued Executive Order No. 13 abolishing the PAGC and transferring its investigative, adjudicatory and recommendatory functions to the Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary for Legal Affairs (ODESLA) through a newly created Investigative and Adjudicatory Division (IAD).
- Administrative complaint against petitioner
- On April 6, 2011, Secretary Cesar V. Purisima filed with IAD-ODESLA an administrative complaint for grave misconduct against Prospero A. Pichay, Jr., Chairman of the LWUA Board, and other LWUA trustees, arising from the purchase of 445,377 shares of Express Savings Bank, Inc.
- On April 14, 2011, Executive Secretary Paquito N. Ochoa, Jr. ordered Pichay to submit a written explanation under oath. Pichay moved to dismiss, citing a pending identical case before the Ombudsman, and thereafter filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition to declare E.O. 13 unconstitutional and stop the administrative proceedings.
- Grounds of unconstitutionality alleged
- E.O. 13 usurps the legislature’s power to create public offices.
- E.O. 13 usurps the legislature’s power to appropriate funds.
- E.O. 13 usurps Congress’s power to delegate quasi-judicial powers.
- E.O. 13 encroaches on the Ombudsman’s powers.
- E.O. 13 violates due process.
- E.O. 13 violates equal protection.
Issues:
- Whether E.O. 13 is a valid exercise of the President’s continuing authority under E.O. 292 to reorganize the Office of the President.
- Whether E.O. 13 improperly creates a new public office in usurpation of Congress’s power.
- Whether E.O. 13 usurps Congress’s power of the purse by reallocating appropriated funds without legislative authorization.
- Whether E.O. 13 unlawfully delegates quasi-judicial powers to the IAD-ODESLA.
- Whether E.O. 13 encroaches on the Ombudsman’s primary jurisdiction.
- Whether E.O. 13 violates the constitutional guarantee of due process.
- Whether E.O. 13 violates the Equal Protection Clause.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)