Case Summary (G.R. No. 196425)
Creation and Powers of the PAGC under E.O. 12
E.O. 12 vested the collegiate PAGC with authority to investigate or hear administrative cases against presidential appointees and to submit factual findings, legal conclusions, and penalty recommendations to the President.
Abolition of PAGC and Transfer of Functions by E.O. 13
E.O. 13 abolished the PAGC, created an Investigative and Adjudicatory Division within ODESLA, and transferred PAGC’s powers, emphasizing the government’s policy of streamlining bureaucracy, economy, and efficiency.
Administrative Proceeding Initiated against Petitioner
Finance Secretary Purisima filed an affidavit for grave misconduct before IAD-ODESLA concerning LWUA’s stock purchase. Petitioner received an order to submit a written explanation and filed a motion to dismiss, citing a pending Ombudsman case on the same transaction.
Constitutional and Statutory Grounds of the Petition
Petitioner alleged E.O. 13 usurped legislative power to create public offices, appropriate funds, and delegate quasi-judicial functions; encroached on the Ombudsman’s powers; and violated due process and equal protection under the 1987 Constitution.
President’s Continuing Authority to Reorganize under E.O. 292
The Court held that Sec. 31 of E.O. 292 grants the President continuing delegated authority to abolish, consolidate, or merge units within the Office of the President Proper for simplicity, economy, and efficiency, including transferring functions among units.
Reorganization Versus Creation of a Distinct Office
The transfer of PAGC functions to an existing office (ODESLA) merely involved restructuring by establishing a new division. It did not create a separate agency, but altered internal lines of control—an act squarely within Sec. 31(1) of E.O. 292.
Good Faith and Economical Purpose of the Reorganization
E.O. 13’s Whereas clauses and the absence of a separate budget allocation for IAD-ODESLA demonstrated the President’s bona fide intention to streamline operations, eradicate corruption, and promote efficiency without additional congressional appropriation.
Legislative Power over Appropriations Not Usurped
Congress appropriated funds for the President’s Office in the General Appropriations Acts. Under Art. VI, Sec. 25(5) of the 1987 Constitution and P.D. 1177, the President may realign or augment his office’s budget from savings, so sourcing funds for IAD-ODESLA did not usurp legislative appropriation.
Investigative and Recommendatory Nature of IAD-ODESLA
Despite “Adjudicatory” in its name, IAD-ODESLA is limited to fact-finding, report preparation, and recommendations. It lacks authority to apply law authoritatively or render final decisions—functions reserved to judicial or duly delegated quasi-judicial bodies.
Non-Encroachment on Ombudsman’s Jurisdiction
The Ombudsman’s primary jurisdiction applies to crimi
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 196425)
Procedural Background
- Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with prayer for Temporary Restraining Order filed by petitioner.
- Challenge to Executive Order No. 13 (E.O. 13) as unconstitutional and an attempt to permanently enjoin respondents from proceeding under its authority.
- Underlying administrative complaint filed by Finance Secretary Purisima before the IAD-ODESLA for grave misconduct.
- Petitioner moved to dismiss ex abundante cautelam, invoking pending Ombudsman case on the same facts.
- Petition framed six constitutional questions regarding E.O. 13’s validity.
Facts
- April 16, 2001: President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issues E.O. 12 creating the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission (PAGC) with power to investigate and hear administrative cases against presidential appointees, submitting findings to the President.
- November 15, 2010: President Benigno S. Aquino III issues E.O. 13 abolishing the PAGC and transferring its investigative, adjudicatory, and recommendatory functions to the Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary for Legal Affairs (ODESLA), newly creating its Investigative and Adjudicatory Division (IAD-ODESLA).
- E.O. 13’s Whereas clauses emphasize the government’s policy to eradicate corruption, streamline bureaucracy for economy and efficiency, and the President’s reorganization powers under the Constitution, Administrative Code, PD 1416 (as amended), and R.A. 9970.
- April 6, 2011: Secretary Purisima files complaint-affidavit against petitioner and other LWUA board members before IAD-ODESLA alleging grave misconduct in a bank‐shares acquisition.
- April 14, 2011: Executive Secretary Ochoa issues Order requiring petitioner’s written explanation under oath.
- Petitioner failed to file explanation, later contended no plain, speedy, adequate remedy exists except the present petition.
Issues Presented
- Whether E.O. 13 unconstitutionally usurps:
- Congress’s power to create public offices.
- Congress’s power to appropriate funds.
- Congress’s exclusive delegation of quasi-judicial powers.
- The Ombudsman’s constitutional powers.
- Whether E.O. 13 violates:
- Guarantee of due process.
- Equal protection clause.
Constitutionality Under Continuing Reorganization Authority
- E.O. 292 (Administrative Code of 1987), Section 31 grants the President continuing authority to reorganize the Office of the President Proper by abolishing, consolidating, merging units, or transferring functions to achieve simplicity, economy, eff