Case Summary (A.C. No. 6281)
Administrative Complaint and Ex Parte Suspension
Pedro T. Wycoco charged Mayor Crespo with harassment, abuse of authority, and oppression. Under Section 5 of RA 5185, Crespo submitted a written explanation to the Provincial Board. Without notifying him or his counsel, the Board conducted an ex parte hearing on February 15, 1971, received testimonial and documentary evidence solely from Wycoco, and adopted Resolution No. 51, preventively suspending Crespo from office.
Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition, and Injunction
Crespo sought to annul Resolution No. 51 and enjoin its enforcement, arguing that the preventive suspension violated both the hearing requirement of RA 5185 and fundamental due process. The Supreme Court granted a preliminary injunction on May 3, 1971, restraining the Board from enforcing the suspension pending final resolution.
Due Process Principles Under the 1987 Constitution
The Court reaffirmed that a public office constitutes a property right protected by due process. Citing Callanta v. Carnation Philippines, Inc. and foundational American and Philippine precedents, it emphasized that no one may be condemned or deprived of office without prior notice and a fair hearing before an impartial body.
Court’s Analysis and Findings
- Lack of Proof of Notice: The Provincial Board failed to substantiate its claim that Crespo’s counsel had requested or received an opportunity to appear at the hearing.
- Exclusion of Mayor’s Explanation: The Board relied exclusively on ex parte evidence and did not consider Crespo’s written explanation as required by RA 5185.
- Violation of Procedural Due Process: The absence of
Case Syllabus (A.C. No. 6281)
Facts
- Petitioner Gregorio T. Crespo was elected Municipal Mayor of Cabiao, Nueva Ecija in the 1967 local elections.
- On January 25, 1971, respondent Pedro T. Wycoco filed an administrative complaint against Mayor Crespo alleging harassment, abuse of authority, and oppression.
- Pursuant to Section 5 of Republic Act No. 5185, petitioner submitted a written explanation to the Provincial Board of Nueva Ecija.
- On February 15, 1971, the Provincial Board conducted a hearing without notifying petitioner or his counsel.
- During that hearing, respondent Wycoco presented testimonial and documentary evidence ex parte.
- Based solely on the ex parte evidence, the Board adopted Resolution No. 51, preventively suspending Crespo from office.
Procedural History
- Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition, and injunction, with a prayer for preliminary injunction, seeking to annul Resolution No. 51 and enjoin its enforcement.
- On May 3, 1971, the Supreme Court issued a preliminary injunction in favor of petitioner.
- The Provincial Board submitted a memorandum contending that petitioner’s counsel had requested—and then failed to appear at—the scheduled hearing.
- Records show no proof of proper notice or that petitioner’s written explanation was considered at the February 15 proceeding.
Issues
- Whether the Provincial Board’s preventive suspension order was valid under Section 5 of Republic Act No. 5185.
- Whethe