Case Digest (G.R. No. 138965) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Public Interest Center Inc., Laureano T. Angeles, and Jocelyn P. Celestino v. Magdangal B. Elma and Ronaldo Zamora (G.R. No. 138965, June 30, 2006), petitioners filed an original action for Certiorari, Prohibition, and Mandamus, with a prayer for a Temporary Restraining Order/Writ of Preliminary Injunction on June 30, 1999. They challenged the simultaneous appointments of respondent Magdangal B. Elma as Chairman of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG), sworn in on October 30, 1998, and as Chief Presidential Legal Counsel (CPLC), sworn in on January 12, 1999, arguing that these concurrent positions contravened Section 13, Article VII, and Section 7, paragraph 2, Article IX-B of the 1987 Constitution. Petitioners sought to enjoin Elma from performing duties or receiving compensation for either office during the pendency of the petition. Respondent Ronaldo Zamora was sued in his capacity as Executive Secretary. No lower court proceedings were involved, as th Case Digest (G.R. No. 138965) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Parties and Action
- Petitioners: Public Interest Center Inc., Laureano T. Angeles, Jocelyn P. Celestino.
- Respondents: Magdangal B. Elma (Chairman of the Presidential Commission on Good Government — PCGG; Chief Presidential Legal Counsel — CPLC), Ronaldo Zamora (Executive Secretary).
- Nature of action: Original petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus with prayer for temporary restraining order/writ of preliminary injunction, filed June 30, 1999.
- Appointments and Constitutional Challenge
- October 30, 1998: Elma appointed and took oath as PCGG Chairman.
- January 11–12, 1999: Elma appointed and took oath as CPLC; he waived any remuneration as CPLC.
- Petitioners alleged that concurrent appointments violate Section 13, Article VII and Section 7(2), Article IX-B of the 1987 Constitution and involve holding incompatible offices.
- Procedural Developments and Mootness
- Petitioners relied on Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary (1991) to argue strict prohibition against multiple offices.
- Respondents contended Section 13, Article VII applies only to Cabinet members and their deputies/assistants; Section 7(2), Article IX-B allows concurrent appointments if permitted by law or primary functions and if offices are compatible.
- In 2001, a new administration replaced Elma’s appointments (PCGG Chair now Camilo Sabio; CPLC position vacant), rendering the case ostensibly moot but raising an issue “capable of repetition, yet evading review.”
Issues:
- Does Section 13, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution prohibit the concurrent holding of the offices of PCGG Chairman and Chief Presidential Legal Counsel?
- Does Section 7, paragraph 2, Article IX-B of the 1987 Constitution bar such concurrent appointments on the ground of incompatibility of offices?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)