Case Summary (G.R. No. 211564)
Petitioners
• G.R. No. 81954: Cesar Dario (Deputy Commissioner).
• G.R. No. 81967: Vicente A. Feria Jr. (Deputy Commissioner).
• G.R. No. 82023: Thirty-two Customs collectors and examiners.
• G.R. No. 85310: Two hundred seventy-nine rank-and-file Customs officers and employees.
• G.R. No. 85335: Thirty-five more Customs officials ordered reinstated.
• G.R. No. 86241: Five additional Customs officials ordered reinstated.
• G.R. No. 83737: Benedicto Amasa and William Dionisio, Customs examiners challenging Republic Act No. 6656.
Respondents
• Commissioner Salvador M. Mison, in his official capacity.
• Civil Service Commission, Patricia A. Sto. Tomas (Chairman).
• Secretary of Finance and Executive Secretary, in related petitions.
Key Dates
• February 25, 1986: Proclamation No. 1 calls for courtesy resignations.
• March 25, 1986: Proclamation No. 3 (“Freedom Constitution”) mandates reorganization.
• May 28, 1986: Executive Order No. 17 prescribes grounds for separation.
• August 6, 1986: Executive Order No. 39 grants Customs Commissioner appointment powers.
• January 30, 1987: Executive Order No. 127 reorganizes Ministry of Finance (including Customs).
• February 2, 1987: 1987 Constitution takes effect.
• January 6 and January 26, 1988: Memoranda and notices terminate Customs officers effective February 28, 1988.
• June 30, 1988: Civil Service Commission orders immediate reinstatement of 279 employees.
• September 20, 1988: Commission denies reconsideration.
• November 16, 1988: Commission orders reinstatement of five additional employees.
• June 10, 1988: Republic Act No. 6656 (“Security of Tenure Act”) enacted; effective June 29, 1988.
• October 20, 1988: Commissioner files certiorari with Supreme Court.
• November 29, 1988: Consolidation of all related petitions.
Applicable Law
• 1987 Constitution, Art. IX-B, Sec. 2(3)—civil service removal “only for cause provided by law.”
• 1987 Constitution, Art. XVIII, Sec. 16—transitory provision allowing separation not for cause under Proclamation No. 3 and “reorganization following ratification.”
• Proclamation No. 3 (Freedom Constitution), Arts. II(1)(a), III(2–4)—transitional reorganization authority.
• Executive Order No. 17 (1986)—guidelines limiting dismissals to grounds of corruption, inefficiency or unfitness.
• Executive Order No. 39 (1986)—autonomy for Customs Commissioner in appointments and disciplinary actions.
• Executive Order No. 127 (1987), Secs. 55, 59—hold-over status, new staffing pattern and deemed separation of non-reappointed incumbents.
• Malacañang and BOC memoranda (October 2, 1987; January 6, 1988)—implementation schedules and appeals procedures.
• Republic Act No. 6656 (1988), Secs. 2, 9, 11, 13—security of tenure, removal only for cause, reinstatement remedies, retroactivity.
• Civil Service Law (PD 807) and Rules of Court (Rule 65 certiorari).
Issues
- Whether Proclamation No. 3 and EO 127 validly authorized the separation “not for cause” of career civil service employees after February 2, 1987.
- Whether Section 59 of EO 127 (“deemed separation” of non-reappointed incumbents) remained operative under the 1987 Constitution.
- Whether the Bureau’s reorganization was undertaken in good faith or was a partisan purge disguised as restructuring.
- Whether Republic Act No. 6656’s provisions (especially retroactivity and reinstatement remedies) conflict with the 1987 Constitution.
- Whether the Civil Service Commission’s reinstatement resolutions committed grave abuse of discretion.
Court’s Ruling
• The Civil Service Commission resolutions of June 30, 1988; September 20, 1988; November 16, 1988; and May 8, 1989 are affirmed.
• The petitions of the separated employees (G.R. Nos. 81954, 81967, 82023, 85335) are granted.
• The petitions of Commissioner Mison (G.R. Nos. 85310, 86241) and the challenge to RA 6656 (G.R. No. 83737) are dismissed.
• Commissioner of Customs is ordered to reinstate all employees separated by his January 26, 1988 notices.
• Those newly appointed to their posts are directed to vacate; applicable separation or retirement benefits must be paid.
Constitutional Framework
The 1987 Constitution’s transitory provision (Art. XVIII, Sec. 16) permits separation “not for cause” only as a consequence of reorganization under Proclamation No. 3 and “the reorganization following the ratification.” All other removals thereafter must comply with the general constitutional guarantee of removal “only for cause.”
Provisional Constitution and Transitional Reorganization
Under the Freedom Constitution (Proclamation No. 3; EO 17), the President had plenary authority—limited to one year from February 25, 1986—to reorganize government and separate employees not for cause, subject to guidelines protecting the deserving career service. Executive Orders for departmental reorganization (including EO 127 for Finance and Customs) were issued in January 1987 to meet that deadline.
Transitory Provisions and 1987 Constitution
When the 1987 Constitution took effect on February 2, 1987, the special transitional authority lapsed, except that the reorganization “pursuant to Proclamation No. 3” could continue transitively. Thereafter, all new reorganizations had to adhere to constitutional safeguards—removal only for cause—and be executed in good faith. Section 16’s reference to two stages (before and after ratification) recognizes the continuance of the same Proclamation No. 3 reorganization until completed, not a new open-ended dismissal power.
Good Faith Requirement and Customs Reorganization
A lawful reorganization under the Constitution must be bona fide—aimed at economy, efficiency or redundancy removal—and must not resemble a political purge. Records show that after February 2, 1987, the Customs Bureau underwent no genuine structural overhaul
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 211564)
Facts of the Case
- On March 25, 1986 President Aquino issued Proclamation No. 3 (“Freedom Constitution”) mandating a “complete reorganization of the government.”
- Pursuant thereto, Executive Order (E.O.) No. 17 (May 28, 1986) prescribed grounds for separation “not for cause” and safeguards for career civil servants.
- E.O. No. 39 (August 6, 1986) granted the Customs Commissioner autonomy over personnel appointments and discipline.
- E.O. No. 127 (January 30, 1987) reorganized the Ministry of Finance, including the Bureau of Customs, abolishing units not in the new structure and placing incumbents on “hold-over” status, to be reappointed or deemed separated.
- The 1987 Constitution took effect on February 2, 1987, with transitory Section 16, Article XVIII, extending Freedom-Constitution reorganizations and benefits to those separated “not for cause.”
- Commissioner Mison, in early 1988, issued uniform notices terminating some 394 Customs officers and employees effective February 28, 1988, as part of the reorganization.
- A Reorganization Appeals Board and the Civil Service Commission (CSC) reviewed petitions for reinstatement; the CSC ordered immediate reappointment and back salaries for hundreds of Customs employees via Resolutions of June 30, September 20, and November 16, 1988.
Procedural History
- G.R. No. 81954 (Cesar Dario), G.R. No. 81967 (Vicente Feria, Jr.), and G.R. No. 82023 (a group of collectors and examiners) challenged the lawfulness of their terminations.
- G.R. No. 83737 (Amasa & Dionisio) attacked the constitutionality of Republic Act No. 6656.
- G.R. No. 85310 and G.R. No. 86241 (Commissioner Mison) sought certiorari to annul CSC reinstatement orders.
- G.R. No. 85335 (thirty-five Customs officers) moved to compel Mison’s compliance with CSC orders.
- The Supreme Court consolidated all seven petitions, heard extensive oral arguments and memoranda, then rendered the en banc decision on August 8, 1989.
Legal Issues
- May a “complete reorganization” under Proclamation No. 3 and its implementing E.O.s continue after February 2, 1987, under Section 16, Article XVIII of the 1987 Constitution?
- Does the 1987 Constitution’s security-of-tenure guarantee (Article IX-B, Section 2[3]) bar removals “not for cause” after its effectivity?
- Was Commissioner Mison’s termination of Customs personnel in early 1988 validly grounded in a bona fide reorganization?
- Are CSC reinstatement orders subject to Supreme Court certiorari review under Rule 65?
- Is Republic Act N