G.R. No. 133132 (Canonizado v. Aguirre, January 25, 2000) (CASE DIGEST)

G.R. No. 133132 (Canonizado v. Aguirre, January 25, 2000)

Facts Petitioners Alexis C. Canonizado, Edgar Dula Torres, and Rogelio A. Pureza were appointed Commissioners of the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM) under Republic Act No. 6975 (RA 6975),. None of their six-year terms had expired when Republic Act No. 8551 (RA 8551), the “Philippine National Police Reform and Reorganization Act of 1998,” took effect on March 6, 1998,,. Section 8 of RA 8551 declared that the “terms of office of the current Commissioners are deemed expired” upon the Actโ€™s effectivity, which resulted in the petitioners’ separation from office,. Petitioners challenged Section 8 of RA 8551, arguing that their removal violated their constitutionally guaranteed right to security of tenure,. Public respondents claimed the provision was valid, asserting that the removal was pursuant to a bona fide reorganization and implied abolition of the NAPOLCOM created under RA 6975.

Issues

  1. Whether Section 8 of RA 8551, which declared the terms of office of the incumbent NAPOLCOM Commissioners “deemed expired,” violated the petitioners’ constitutional right to security of tenure,.
  2. Whether the changes introduced by RA 8551 amounted to a bona fide abolition or reorganization of the NAPOLCOM sufficient to warrant the removal of the incumbents,.

Ruling “WHEREFORE, we grant the petition, but only to the extent of declaring section 8 of RA 8551 unconstitutional for being in violation of the petitioners’ right to security of tenure. The removal from office of petitioners as a result of the application of such unconstitutional provision of law and the appointment of new Commissioners in their stead is therefore null and void. Petitioners herein are entitled to REINSTATEMENT and to the payment of full backwages to be reckoned from the date they were removed from office”,.

Essential Elements of Jurisprudence

  1. Security of Tenure: Members of the civil service (which includes NAPOLCOM Commissioners) cannot be removed or suspended from office “except for cause provided by law”. This cause must be a legal cause, and not merely reasons the appointing power deems sufficient in the exercise of discretion.
  2. Legislative Power to Abolish Office: Congress has the power to abolish any office it creates without impairing the officer’s right to continue in the position. However, for an abolition to be valid, it must be made in good faith and not for political or personal reasons, or in order to circumvent the constitutional security of tenure,.
  3. Test of Bad Faith Abolition: An abolition of an office lacks good faith and is a legal nullity if the abolished office and the offices created in its place have similar functions. Where there is merely a change of nomenclature of positions, the abolition is invalid and does not result in the removal of the incumbent.
  4. Reorganization Defined: A valid reorganization must result in an alteration of the existing structure of government offices, involving a reduction of personnel, consolidation of offices, or abolition thereof by reason of economy or redundancy of functions. A reorganization, like abolition, must pass the test of good faith, meaning it is carried out for efficiency or economy, and not purposely to defeat security of tenure.
  5. No Bona Fide Reorganization of NAPOLCOM: RA 8551 did not effect a bona fide abolition or reorganization of the NAPOLCOM because the amendments introduced (e.g., change in attachment status, revision of composition, and addition of “operational supervision”) did not substantially change the NAPOLCOM’s nature, composition, or powers and duties,,,. The NAPOLCOM continued to exercise substantially the same administrative, supervisory, rule-making, advisory, and adjudicatory functions.
  6. Effect of Invalid Removal: When a regular government employee is illegally dismissed, the position is considered never to have become vacant, and subsequent appointments made to replace the incumbent are null and void,.

Sample Q&A

Question: The legislature passed an amendatory law that reformed the NAPOLCOM, changing its status from a collegial body within the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) to an agency merely attached to the DILG for policy coordination, and expanding its functions to include “operational supervision” over the PNP. If a provision in this law (RA 8551, Sec. 8) declared that the terms of office of the incumbent Commissioners were “deemed expired,” thereby resulting in their removal, would this provision be constitutional? Cite relevant constitutional and statutory provisions.

Answer: No, the provision would be unconstitutional. The constitutional right to security of tenure for civil service employees (Constitution, Article IX (B), Section 2(3)) prohibits removal except for cause provided by law. Although the legislature may abolish an office it creates, such an act must be in good faith. Declaring terms “deemed expired” or positions “vacant” is an infringement of security of tenure unless done pursuant to a bona fide abolition or reorganization,. Since the changes in the NAPOLCOM’s functions (such as the slight revision in attachment status and the addition of “operational supervision”) did not constitute substantial or essential changes, and the office’s core structure and duties remained substantially the same, the law did not effect a bona fide reorganization or abolition,,. Therefore, RA 8551, Section 8, was merely a legal device to remove incumbents without legal cause, rendering the provision void ab initio for violating security of tenure,.


#SecurityOfTenure #CivilServiceLawPH #LegislativeAbolition #BonaFideReorganization #NAPOLCOMCommissioners #RA8551 #CanonizadovAguirre #GRNo133132 #PublicOffice #IllegalRemoval #CivilServiceEligibility#ConstitutionalLawPH #AdministrativeLawPH #PoliceReformAct #SeparationOfPowers #SupremeCourtPH #PhilippineJurisprudence #LegalUpdatesPH #LawStudentsPH #CivilServiceCommission#LawPH #LegalStrategy #CourtDecisions #LegalCommunity #LawyersOfManila #AttyLife #PHGovt #JusticeSystem


Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *