Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

    • 278 views

    Flores V Drilon Digest

    Uploaded by

    Trxc Magsino
    The Supreme Court ruled Section 13(d) of the Bases Conversion and Development Act of 1992 unconstitutional. Section 13(d) directed the President to appoint the incumbent Mayor of Olongapo City as chairman and CEO of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority for its first year of operations. The Court held this violated the constitutional provision prohibiting the appointment of elective officials to other government posts during their tenure. While Congress can prescribe qualifications, limiting appointment to a single candidate infringes on the President's appointment power. As an incumbent elective official, Mayor Gordon was ineligible for appointment and could only be considered after resigning from his elective post.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Flores V Drilon Digest

    Uploaded by

    Trxc Magsino
    278 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court ruled Section 13(d) of the Bases Conversion and Development Act of 1992 unconstitutional. Section 13(d) directed the President to appoint the incumbent Mayor of Olongapo City as chairman and CEO of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority for its first year of operations. The Court held this violated the constitutional provision prohibiting the appointment of elective officials to other government posts during their tenure. While Congress can prescribe qualifications, limiting appointment to a single candidate infringes on the President's appointment power. As an incumbent elective official, Mayor Gordon was ineligible for appointment and could only be considered after resigning from his elective post.

    Original Description:

    PIL digest

    Original Title

    Flores v Drilon Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled Section 13(d) of the Bases Conversion and Development Act of 1992 unconstitutional. Section 13(d) directed the President to appoint the incumbent Mayor of Olongapo City as chairman and CEO of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority for its first year of operations. The Court held this violated the constitutional provision prohibiting the appointment of elective officials to other government posts during their tenure. While Congress can prescribe qualifications, limiting appointment to a single candidate infringes on the President's appointment power. As an incumbent elective official, Mayor Gordon was ineligible for appointment and could only be considered after resigning from his elective post.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    278 views2 pages

    Flores V Drilon Digest

    Uploaded by

    Trxc Magsino
    The Supreme Court ruled Section 13(d) of the Bases Conversion and Development Act of 1992 unconstitutional. Section 13(d) directed the President to appoint the incumbent Mayor of Olongapo City as chairman and CEO of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority for its first year of operations. The Court held this violated the constitutional provision prohibiting the appointment of elective officials to other government posts during their tenure. While Congress can prescribe qualifications, limiting appointment to a single candidate infringes on the President's appointment power. As an incumbent elective official, Mayor Gordon was ineligible for appointment and could only be considered after resigning from his elective post.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    Flores v Drilon (223 SCRA 568)

    AUTHOR: Magsino, Patricia Marie C.


    TOPIC: Restrictions on the power of congress to prescribe NOTES: NOTE ISSUE NO. 1 & 4
    qualifications restrictive provisions
    PONENTE: Bellosillo, J.
    FACTS:
    Petitioners,taxpayersandemployeesofU.SfacilitiesatSubic,challengetheconstitutionalityofSec.13(d)ofthe
    BasesConversionandDevelopmentActof1992(RA7227)
    ThisdirectsthePresidenttoappointaprofessionalmanagerasadministratoroftheSBMAprovidedthatforthe1st
    yearofitsoperations,themayorofOlongapoCity(RichardGordon)shallbeappointedasthechairmanandtheCEO
    oftheSubicAuthority
    Respondent Mayor Richard J. Gordon of Olongapo City was appointed as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of
    the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority
    PETITIONERS:

    Petitioners maintain that this infringes the constitutional provision of Sec. 7, first par., Art. IX-B, of the
    Constitution, which states "no elective official shall be eligible for appointment or designation in any capacity to
    any public officer or position during his tenure"
    The petitioners also contend that Congress encroached upon the discretionary power of the President to appoint

    RESPONDENTS:

    Respondents argue that Sec. 94 of the Local Government Code permits the appointment of a local elective official
    to another post if so allowed by law or by the primary functions of his office COURT HELD THIS
    CONTENTION IS FALLACIOUS
    No legislative act can prevail over the fundamental law of the land COURT FINDS NO NEED TO DISCUSS
    THIS ISSUE

    ISSUE(S):
    Does the proviso violate the constitutional proscription against appointment or designation of elective
    officialstoothergovernmentposts
    Are the SBMA posts merely ex officio to the position of Mayor of Olongapo City and thus an excepted
    circumstance
    IstheConstitutionalprovisionallowinganelectiveofficialtoreceivedoublecompensation(Sec.8,Art.IXB)
    uselessifnoelectiveofficialmaybeappointedtoanotherpost
    IstherelegislativeencroachmentontheappointingauthorityofthePresident
    CanMayorGordonretainanyandallperdiems,allowancesandotheremoluments,whichhemayhavereceived
    pursuanttohisappointment

    HELD/RATIO:

    YES. Sec.7ofArt.IXBoftheConstitutionProvides:Noelectiveofficialshallbeeligibleforappointmentor
    designationinanycapacitytoanypublicofficeorpositionduringhistenure.Unlessotherwiseallowedbylawor
    bytheprimaryfunctionsofhisposition,noappointiveofficialshallholdanyotherofficeoremploymentinthe
    Governmentoranysubdivision,agencyorinstrumentalitythereof,includinggovernmentownedorcontrolled
    corporationsortheirsubsidiaries.ThesubjectprovisodirectsthePresidenttoappointanelectiveofficiali.e.the
    MayorofOlongapoCity,toothergovernmentpost(asChairmanandCEOofSBMA).Thisispreciselywhatthe
    Constitutionprohibits.Itseekstopreventasituationwherealocalelectiveofficialwillworkforhisappointment
    inanexecutivepositioningovernment,andneglecthisconstituents.

    NO.CongressdidnotcontemplatemakingtheSBMApostsasautomaticallyattachedtotheOfficeoftheMayor

    withoutneedofappointment.ThephraseshallbeappointedunquestionablyshowstheintenttomaketheSBMA
    postsappointiveandnotmerelyadjuncttothepostofMayorofOlongapoCity.

    NO. Sec. 8 does not affect the constitutionality of the subject proviso. In any case, the VicePresident for
    example,anelectiveofficialwhomaybeappointedtoacabinetpostmayreceivethecompensationattachedtothe
    cabinet

    position

    if

    specifically

    authorized

    by

    law.

    YES.AlthoughSection13(d)itselfvestsinthePresidentthepowertoappointtheChairmanofSBMA,hereally
    hasnochoicebuttoappointtheMayorofOlongapoCity.Thepowerofchoiceistheheartofthepowertoappoint.
    Appointmentinvolvesanexerciseofdiscretionofwhomtoappoint.WhenCongressclothesthePresidentwiththe
    powertoappointanofficer,itcannotatthesametimelimitthechoiceofthePresidenttoonlyonecandidate.Such
    enactmenteffectivelyeliminatesthediscretionoftheappointingpowertochooseandconstitutesanirregular
    restrictiononthepowerofappointment.Whileitmaybeviewedthattheprovisomerelysetsthequalificationsof
    the officer duringthe first year of operations of SBMA, i.e., he must be the Mayor of Olongapo City, it is
    manifestlyan abuseof congressional authority to prescribe qualifications where onlyone, andno other, can
    qualify.Sincetheineligibilityofanelectiveofficialforappointmentremainsallthroughouthistenureorduring
    his incumbency, he may however resign first from his elective post to cast off the constitutionallyattached
    disqualificationbeforehemaybeconsideredfitforappointment.Consequently,aslongasheisanincumbent,an
    elective official remains ineligible for appointment to another public office.

    YES.Asincumbentelectiveofficial,GordonisineligibleforappointmenttothepositionofChairmanandCEOof
    SBMA;hisappointmentcannotbesustained.HeremainsMayorofOlongapoCity,andhisactsasSBMAofficial
    arenotnecessarilynullandvoid;hemaybeconsideredadefactoofficer,andinaccordancewithjurisprudence,is
    entitledtosuchbenefits.

    CASE LAW/ DOCTRINE:


    DISSENTING/CONCURRING OPINION(S):

    You might also like