Case Summary (G.R. No. 106677)
Background and Legal Framework
The pivotal legal question revolves around the interpretation of the power of appointment conferred to the President under Presidential Decree No. 223, particularly its provision regarding succession in the event of a vacancy in the commission. Acting Secretary of Justice Silvestre H. Bello III opined that the President's appointing power transcended the stipulation implied in P.D. No. 223, reinforcing Executive prerogatives against potential legislative encroachment.
Appointment and Legal Challenges
Pobre was appointed by President Corazon C. Aquino to serve as PRC Commissioner/Chairman after having taken his oath of office on February 17, 1992. Mendieta contested this appointment by arguing that as the senior Associate Commissioner, he had the legal right to succeed Francia in accordance with Section 2 of P.D. No. 223. Initial judicial proceedings concluded with a ruling favoring Mendieta, asserting that Pobre's appointment was invalid.
Judicial Rulings and Subsequent Actions
Judge Ibay-Somera ruled in favor of Mendieta on August 5, 1992, citing the intent of P.D. No. 223 to establish a clear succession process. The ruling mandated a writ of prohibitory injunction that barred Pobre from assuming the responsibilities of the PRC Commissioner/Chairman. Subsequently, Pobre filed petitions for certiorari with the Supreme Court, arguing for the validity of his appointment.
Supreme Court Decision
The Supreme Court provided a comprehensive analysis of the procedural and substantive issues surrounding the appointment process outlined by P.D. No. 223. The Court concluded that the succession clause as interpreted by Judge Ibay-Somera did not accurately reflect the legislative intent behind the law. The Court held that the provision regarding filling vacancies applies only when there is an "unexpired term" of a Chairman in a situation of resignation or removal before a full term concludes; otherwise, the appointment of a new Commissioner falls under the President's prerogative.
Interpretation of the Succession Clause
The Supreme Court identified ambiguities within P.D. No. 223's language regarding succession. It determined that the clause related to "unexpired term only" should logically apply only to the Chairperson's term. Therefore, should a President's term expire, only then can the President appoint a successor, thus maintaining the executive's authority over appointments in the commission'
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 106677)
Case Background
- The case revolves around the consolidated petitions filed by Hermogenes P. Pobre against Mariano A. Mendieta and Judge Corona Ibay-Somera regarding the appointment as Commissioner/Chairman of the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC).
- The petitions aimed to annul the decision dated August 5, 1992, and the writ of prohibitory injunction dated August 19, 1992, which annulled Pobre's appointment by President Corazon C. Aquino and enjoined him from performing his duties.
- The conflict began when the term of Julio B. Francia as PRC Commissioner expired on January 2, 1992.
Legal Framework
- The legal basis for the appointment and succession in the PRC is defined under Section 2 of P.D. No. 223, which mandates that the Commission shall be headed by a Commissioner and two Associate Commissioners appointed by the President for a term of nine years.
- The provision specifies that vacancies shall be filled for the unexpired term only by the most senior Associate Commissioner succeeding the Commissioner at the expiration of his term, resignation, or removal.
- The case also references the constitutional provisions granting the President the power to appoint heads of bureaus and offices, including the PRC.
Appointment Controversy
- On January 6, 1992, Executive Secretary Franklin M. Drilon sought clarification regarding the President's appointing power in light of the statutory provisions.
- The Acting Secretary of Justice, Silvestre H. Bello III, opined that the President's pow