G.R. No. 160727 - Union Bank of the Philippines vs. Concepcion

Case Summary (G.R. No. 160727)

Facts

In the 1995 local elections the Governor, Vice‑Governor (petitioner) and SP members (respondents among them) were duly elected. While the Governor was abroad in August 1995, he designated the Vice‑Governor to act as Governor. At an SP session on September 6, 1995, certain members questioned the authority of the Vice‑Governor, then Acting Governor, to continue presiding over the SP; petitioner refused to vacate the Chair. At a subsequent session a majority of seven SP members voted to allow him to continue presiding while four voted against and one abstained. Respondents filed a petition in the RTC challenging petitioner’s authority to preside while Acting Governor. The trial court held that petitioner was temporarily incapacitated to preside over SP sessions while acting as Governor and enjoined him from presiding in such circumstances. Petitioner sought review.

Issue Presented

Whether an incumbent Vice‑Governor, while concurrently serving as Acting Governor by virtue of a temporary vacancy in the Governor’s office, may continue to preside over sessions of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan.

Relevant Statutory Provisions

Section 49(a), R.A. 7160: the Vice‑Governor shall be the presiding officer of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan; the presiding officer votes only to break a tie. Section 49(b) provides that in the event of the inability of the regular presiding officer to preside, the members present constituting a quorum shall elect a temporary presiding officer.
Section 46, R.A. 7160: when the Governor is temporarily incapacitated (e.g., travel abroad), the Vice‑Governor shall automatically exercise the powers and perform the duties and functions of the Governor, subject to certain limits.
Section 44 (permanent vacancy rules) and Section 466 (enumerating vice‑governor duties including presiding and assuming the governorship in permanent vacancy) establish modes of succession for permanent vacancies.
Section 48 vests local legislative power in the SP and Section 465 vests executive power in the Governor. Under the new Code the Governor is not enumerated as a member of the SP, unlike the old BP Blg. 337 regime where the Governor was both Chief Executive and presiding officer of the provincial legislature.

Legal Reasoning — Nature of “Acting” Capacity and Its Effect on the Vice‑Governor’s SP Role

The Court distinguished between (a) assuming the office of Governor (permanent succession) and (b) acting as Governor (temporary exercise of powers under Section 46). When the Vice‑Governor “becomes” Governor under Section 44 (permanent vacancy) he assumes the office for the unexpired term; when he “acts” under Section 46 (temporary vacancy) he exercises the Governor’s powers without becoming the Governor. The latter doctrinal distinction, however, does not automatically allow the same person to continue exercising fully the distinct functions of both offices simultaneously where those functions are inconsistent or demand full‑time performance.

R.A. 7160 deliberately separated executive and legislative personalities at the provincial level: the SP is the local legislative body and its membership is expressly enumerated to include the Vice‑Governor as presiding officer (and other members), but not the Governor. By express enumeration, the Governor is excluded from the SP; conversely, executive power is vested exclusively in the Governor. The Code thus disbanded the former union of executive and legislative powers in a single local chief executive that existed under BP Blg. 337. This structural reform supports the conclusion that the offices of Governor and Vice‑Governor carry distinct and non‑intermingling personalities and responsibilities.

Given the foregoing, when the Vice‑Governor is designated Acting Governor and exercises the Governor’s powers under Section 46, this creates a corresponding temporary vacancy or inability in the Vice‑Governor’s own office for purposes of performing those vice‑gubernatorial functions that are incompatible with acting as Chief Executive — most notably the presiding role in the SP. The Court reasoned that the nature and exigencies of gubernatorial duties call for an occupant unencumbered by concurrent chairmanship of the legislative body; the policy of RA 7160 rejects dual performance of both executive and legislative presiding functions by one official in order to preserve checks and balances and better delivery of public service.

Legal Reasoning — Vacancy and “Effective Absence” Doctrine Applied

The Court invoked the sensu contrario principle that an office is vacant when there is no person lawfully authorized to exercise its duties at present, and analogized to the doctrine applied to vice‑mayors: if a mayor is effectively absent (a reasonably construed concept meaning inability to discharge office functions), the vice‑mayor shall discharge mayoral duties. By parity, if the vice‑governor is exercising gubernatorial functions (acting as Governor), the vice‑governor is “effectively absent” from his legislative presiding role, thereby creating a temporary vacancy or inability in the office of Vice‑Governor vis‑à‑vis presiding duties. The Court reli

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 160727)

Case Citation, Court and Date

Reported as 369 Phil. 1133, En Banc.
G.R. No. 134213, decided July 20, 1999.
Decision authored by Justice Ynares‑Santiago, J.
Concurring: Davide, Jr., C.J., Romero, Bellosillo, Melo, Puno, Vitug, Kapunan, Mendoza, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Purisima, Pardo, Buena, and Gonzaga‑Reyes, JJ.

Procedural Posture and Disposition

Petition for review filed by petitioner Romeo J. Gamboa, Jr. from a decision of the Regional Trial Court (Branch 62, Bago City) dated May 8, 1998.
Trial court declared petitioner "temporarily legally incapacitated to preside over the sessions of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan" during the period he was Acting Provincial Governor and prohibited him from presiding in such circumstance; RTC decision’s dispositive portion was quoted in full in the source.
Supreme Court denied the petition for lack of merit.

Central Legal Query Presented

Whether an incumbent Vice‑Governor, who has been designated Acting Governor, may continue to preside over sessions of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan while concurrently exercising the powers and duties of the Governor.

Undisputed Facts

In the 1995 elections, Rafael Coscolluela was elected Governor of Negros Occidental; Romeo J. Gamboa, Jr. was elected Vice‑Governor; Marcelo Aguirre, Jr. and Juan Y. Araneta were elected members of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan (SP).
In August 1995 the Governor designated petitioner as Acting Governor for the duration of the Governor’s official trip abroad.
On the SP regular session of September 6, 1995, respondents questioned petitioner’s authority to preside as presiding officer of the SP in view of his designation as Acting Governor and asked him to vacate the Chair; petitioner refused.
In a later SP session, seven members voted to allow petitioner to continue presiding, four voted against, and one abstained.
On September 22, 1995, respondents filed a petition for declaratory relief and prohibition in the lower court.
On October 2, 1995, the Governor re‑assumed his office.
RTC decision rendered May 8, 1998 declaring petitioner temporarily legally incapacitated to preside as SP presiding officer while Acting Governor.

Threshold Doctrine on Mootness

The Court observed the case was dismissible as moot and academic because terms of the local officials expired in 1998.
Notwithstanding mootness, the Court proceeded to resolve the legal controversy presented as a novel question under existing local government laws.

Governing Statutory Provisions (as cited)

R.A. No. 7160, Local Government Code of 1991:
- Section 49(a): Vice‑Governor shall be the presiding officer of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan; presiding officer votes only to break a tie.
- Section 49(b): In the event of the inability of the regular presiding officer to preside, the members present and constituting a quorum shall elect from among themselves a temporary presiding officer; certification duties of temporary presiding officer described.
- Section 46: Temporary vacancy in the office of the local chief executive—when governor is temporarily incapacitated (e.g., travel abroad) the vice‑governor shall automatically exercise the powers and perform the duties and functions, with limitations (e.g., appointment/suspension/dismissal only if incapacity exceeds 30 working days).
- Section 44: Permanent vacancies—modes of succession; vice‑governor becomes governor in case of permanent vacancy.
- Section 48: Local legislative power shall be exercised by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan.
- Section 465 and Section 466: Chief executive powers and vice‑governor duties and powers (including presiding over SP and standing in for Governor in permanent and temporary vacancies).
References to the old Code: B.P. Blg. 337 provisions cited for contrast (Sections 203, 205, 206, and 467 as quoted/mentioned).

Legal Characterization of Roles under the New Code

The Court described provincial Governor and Vice‑Governor offices as essentially executive in nature; regular SP members perform legislative functions.
Under R.A. 7160 the union of executive and legislative powers in the local chief executive under the old Code has been disbanded: the Governor is not a member or presiding officer of the SP under the new Code.
The SP’s membership is explicitly enumerated in the Code and includes the Vice‑Governor as p