March 1985 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1985 > March 1985 Decisions >
G.R. No. 68159 March 18, 1985 - HOMOBONO A. ADAZA v. FERNANDO PACANA, JR.:
EN BANC
[G.R. No. 68159. March 18, 1985.]
HOMOBONO A. ADAZA, Petitioner, v. FERNANDO PACANA, JR., Respondent.
Arthur Defensor, Douglas Cagas, Hjalmar Quintana, Wilson Gamboa, Jolly Hernandez and Homobono A. Adaza for Petitioner.
Fernando B. Pacana, Jr. for respondent and counsel for himself.
SYLLABUS
1. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW; NATIONAL ASSEMBLY; PROHIBITION AGAINST MEMBER OF THE BATASANG PAMBANSA FROM HOLDING ANY OTHER OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT IN THE GOVERNMENT DURING HIS TENURE, CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS. — The constitutional prohibition under Section 10. Article VIII of the 1973 Constitution against a member of the Batasan Pambansa from holding any other office of employment in the government during his tenure is clear and unambiguous. The language used in the above-cited section is plain, certain and free from ambiguity. The only exceptions mentioned therein are the offices of prime minister and cabinet member. The wisdom or expendiency of the said provision is a matter which is not within the province of the Court to determine.
2. ID.; ID.; ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS; PUBLIC OFFICER SUBJECT TO REGULATIONS AND CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY LAW. — A public office is a public trust. It is created for the interest and the benefit of the people. As such, a holder thereof "is subject to such regulations and conditions as the law may impose" and "he cannot complain of any restrictions which public policy may dictate on his holding of more than one office."cralaw virtua1aw library
3. ID.; ID.; NATIONAL ASSEMBLY; ELECTED MEMBERS OF BATASAN HOLDING INCOMPATIBLE OFFICE; FORMER POSTS DEEMED VACATED. — It is therefore of no avail to petitioner that the system of government in other states allows a local elective official to act as an elected member of the parliament at the same time. The dictate of the people in whom legal sovereignty lies is explicit. It provides no exceptions save the two offices specifically cited in the above-quoted constitutional provision. Thus, while it may be said that within the purely parliamentary system of government no incompatibility, exists in the nature of the two offices under consideration as incompatibility is understood in common law, the incompatibility herein present is one created by no less than the constitution itself. In the case at bar there is no question that petitioner has taken his oath of office as an elected Mambabatas Pambansa and has been discharging his duties as such. In the light of the oft-mentioned constitutional provision, this fact operated to vacate his former post and he cannot now continue to occupy the same, nor attempt to discharge its functions.
4. POLITICAL LAWS; ELECTION LAW; BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 697; FILING OF CERTIFICATE OF CANDIDACY OF MEMBERS OF SANGGUNIANG BAYAN; MEMBER CONSIDERED ON FORCED LEAVE; REASSUMPTION OF POST AFTER LOSING BATASANG PAMBANSA ELECTION, ALLOWED BY LAW. — Batas Pambansa Blg. 697, the law governing the election of members of the Batasan Pambansa on May 14, 1984, Section 13 [2] which specifically provides that "governors, mayors, members of the various sangguniang or barangay officials shall, upon filing a certificate of candidacy be considered on forced leave of absence from office." Indubitably, respondent then vice-governor falls within the coverage of this provision, considering that at the time he filed his certificate of candidacy for the 1984 Batasan Pambansa election he was a member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan as provided in Sections 204 and 205 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 337 otherwise known as the Local Government Code. Thus, when respondent reassumed the position of vice-governor after the Batas Pambansa elections he was acting within the law. His succession to the governorship was equally legal and valid, the same being in accordance with Section 204 [2] [a] of the same Local Government Code.
2. ID.; ID.; ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS; PUBLIC OFFICER SUBJECT TO REGULATIONS AND CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY LAW. — A public office is a public trust. It is created for the interest and the benefit of the people. As such, a holder thereof "is subject to such regulations and conditions as the law may impose" and "he cannot complain of any restrictions which public policy may dictate on his holding of more than one office."cralaw virtua1aw library
3. ID.; ID.; NATIONAL ASSEMBLY; ELECTED MEMBERS OF BATASAN HOLDING INCOMPATIBLE OFFICE; FORMER POSTS DEEMED VACATED. — It is therefore of no avail to petitioner that the system of government in other states allows a local elective official to act as an elected member of the parliament at the same time. The dictate of the people in whom legal sovereignty lies is explicit. It provides no exceptions save the two offices specifically cited in the above-quoted constitutional provision. Thus, while it may be said that within the purely parliamentary system of government no incompatibility, exists in the nature of the two offices under consideration as incompatibility is understood in common law, the incompatibility herein present is one created by no less than the constitution itself. In the case at bar there is no question that petitioner has taken his oath of office as an elected Mambabatas Pambansa and has been discharging his duties as such. In the light of the oft-mentioned constitutional provision, this fact operated to vacate his former post and he cannot now continue to occupy the same, nor attempt to discharge its functions.
4. POLITICAL LAWS; ELECTION LAW; BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 697; FILING OF CERTIFICATE OF CANDIDACY OF MEMBERS OF SANGGUNIANG BAYAN; MEMBER CONSIDERED ON FORCED LEAVE; REASSUMPTION OF POST AFTER LOSING BATASANG PAMBANSA ELECTION, ALLOWED BY LAW. — Batas Pambansa Blg. 697, the law governing the election of members of the Batasan Pambansa on May 14, 1984, Section 13 [2] which specifically provides that "governors, mayors, members of the various sangguniang or barangay officials shall, upon filing a certificate of candidacy be considered on forced leave of absence from office." Indubitably, respondent then vice-governor falls within the coverage of this provision, considering that at the time he filed his certificate of candidacy for the 1984 Batasan Pambansa election he was a member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan as provided in Sections 204 and 205 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 337 otherwise known as the Local Government Code. Thus, when respondent reassumed the position of vice-governor after the Batas Pambansa elections he was acting within the law. His succession to the governorship was equally legal and valid, the same being in accordance with Section 204 [2] [a] of the same Local Government Code.
D E C I S I O N
ESCOLIN, J.:
The issues posed for determination in this petition for prohibition with prayer for a writ of preliminary injunction and/or restraining order are: [1] whether or not a provincial governor who was elected and had qualified as a Mambabatas Pambansa [MP] can exercise and discharge the functions of both offices simultaneously; and [2] whether or not a vice-governor who ran for the position of Mambabatas Pambansa, but lost, can continue serving as vice-governor and subsequently succeed to the office of governor if the said office is vacated.chanrobles virtual lawlibrary
The factual background of the present controversy is as follows:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
Petitioner Homobono A. Adaza was elected governor of the province of Misamis Oriental in the January 30, 1980 elections. He took his oath of office and started discharging his duties as provincial governor on March 3, 1980. Elected vice-governor for said province in the same elections was respondent Fernando Pacana, Jr., who likewise qualified for and assumed said office on March 3, 1980. Under the law, their respective terms of office would expire on March 3, 1986.
On March 27, 1984, respondent Pacana filed his certificate of candidacy for the May 14, 1984 Batasan Pambansa elections; petitioner Adaza followed suit on April 27, 1984. In the ensuing elections, petitioner won by placing first among the candidates, while respondent lost.
Petitioner took his oath of office as Mambabatas Pambansa on July 19, 1984 1 and since then he has discharged the functions of said office.
On July 23, 1984, respondent took his oath of office as governor of Misamis Oriental before President Ferdinand E. Marcos, 2 and started to perform the duties of governor on July 25, 1984.
Claiming to be the lawful occupant of the governor’s office, petitioner has brought this petition to exclude respondent therefrom. He argues that he was elected to said office for a term of six years, that he remains to be the governor of the province until his term expires on March 3, 1986 as provided by law, and that within the context of the parliamentary system, as in France, Great Britain and New Zealand, a local elective official can hold the position to which he had been elected and simultaneously be an elected member of Parliament.
Petitioner further contends that respondent Pacana should be considered to have abandoned or resigned from the position of vice-governor when he filed his certificate of candidacy for the 1984 Batas Pambansa elections; and since respondent had reverted to the status of a mere private citizen after he lost in the Batas Pambansa elections, he could no longer continue to serve as vice-governor, much less assume the office of governor.chanrobles.com:cralaw:red
1. The constitutional prohibition against a member of the Batasan Pambansa from holding any other office or employment in the government during his tenure is clear and unambiguous. Section 10, Article VIII of the 1973 Constitution provides as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"Section 10. A member of the National Assembly [now Batasan Pambansa] shall not hold any other office or employment in the government or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled corporations, during his tenure, except that of prime minister or member of the cabinet . . ."cralaw virtua1aw library
The language used in the above-cited section is plain, certain and free from ambiguity. The only exceptions mentioned therein are the offices of prime minister and cabinet member. The wisdom or expediency of the said provision is a matter which is not within the province of the Court to determine.
A public office is a public trust. 3 It is created for the interest and the benefit of the people. As such, a holder thereof "is subject to such regulations and conditions as the law may impose" and "he cannot complain of any restrictions which public policy may dictate on his holding of more than one office." 4 It is therefore of no avail to petitioner that the system of government in other states allows a local elective official to act as an elected member of the parliament at the same time. The dictate of the people in whom legal sovereignty lies is explicit. It provides no exceptions save the two offices specifically cited in the above-quoted constitutional provision. Thus, while it may be said that within the purely parliamentary system of government no incompatibility exists in the nature of the two offices under consideration, as incompatibility is understood in common law, the incompatibility herein present is one created by no less than the constitution itself. In the case at bar, there is no question that petitioner has taken his oath of office as an elected Mambabatas Pambansa and has been discharging his duties as such. In the light of the oft-mentioned constitutional provision, this fact operated to vacate his former post and he cannot now continue to occupy the same, nor attempt to discharge its functions.
2. The second proposition advanced by petitioner is that respondent Pacana, as a mere private citizen, had no right to assume the governorship left vacant by petitioner’s election to the Batasan Pambansa. He maintains that respondent should be considered as having abandoned or resigned from the vice-governorship when he filed his certificate of candidacy for the Batas Pambansa elections. The point pressed runs afoul of Batas Pambansa Blg. 697, the law governing the election of members of the Batasan Pambansa on May 14, 1984, Section 13[2] of which specifically provides that "governors, mayors, members of the various sangguniang or barangay officials shall, upon filing a certificate of candidacy, be considered on forced leave of absence from office." Indubitably, respondent falls within the coverage of this provision, considering that at the time he filed his certificate of candidacy for the 1984 Batasan Pambansa election he was a member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan as provided in Sections 204 and 205 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 337, 5 otherwise known as the Local Government Code. The reason the position of vice-governor was not included in Section 13[2] of BP Blg. 697 is explained by the following interchange between Assemblymen San Juan and Davide during the deliberations on said legislation:chanroblesvirtualawlibrary
"MR. DAVIDE. If I was able to get correctly the proposed amendment it would cover only governors and members of the different sangguniang? Mayor, governors?
MR. SAN JUAN. Governors, mayors, members of the various sanggunian or barangay officials. A vice-governor is a member of the Sanggunian Panlalawigan.
MR. DAVIDE. All. Why don’t we instead use the word, ‘Local official’?
MR. SAN JUAN. Well, Mr. Speaker, your humble representation.
MR. DAVIDE. And, secondly, why don’t we include the vice-governor, the vice-mayors?
MR. SAN JUAN. Because they are members of the Sanggunians, Mr. Speaker. They are covered by the provision on members of sanggunian." [Record of Proceedings, February 20, 1984, p. 92, Rollo].
Thus, when respondent reassumed the position of vice-governor after the Batas Pambansa elections, he was acting within the law. His succession to the governorship was equally legal and valid, the same being in accordance with Section 204[2] [a] of the same Local Government Code, which reads as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"SECTION 204. Powers, Duties and Privileges:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
1] . . .
2] He shall:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
a] Assume the office of the governor for the expired term of the latter in the cases provided for in Section 48, paragraph 1 6 of this Code;"
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is hereby dismissed. No costs.
Teehankee, Makasiar, Aquino, Concepcion, Jr., Melencio-Herrera, Plana, Relova, Gutierrez, Jr., De la Fuente, Cuevas and Alampay, JJ., concur.
Fernando, C.J. and Abad Santos, J., took no part.
The factual background of the present controversy is as follows:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
Petitioner Homobono A. Adaza was elected governor of the province of Misamis Oriental in the January 30, 1980 elections. He took his oath of office and started discharging his duties as provincial governor on March 3, 1980. Elected vice-governor for said province in the same elections was respondent Fernando Pacana, Jr., who likewise qualified for and assumed said office on March 3, 1980. Under the law, their respective terms of office would expire on March 3, 1986.
On March 27, 1984, respondent Pacana filed his certificate of candidacy for the May 14, 1984 Batasan Pambansa elections; petitioner Adaza followed suit on April 27, 1984. In the ensuing elections, petitioner won by placing first among the candidates, while respondent lost.
Petitioner took his oath of office as Mambabatas Pambansa on July 19, 1984 1 and since then he has discharged the functions of said office.
On July 23, 1984, respondent took his oath of office as governor of Misamis Oriental before President Ferdinand E. Marcos, 2 and started to perform the duties of governor on July 25, 1984.
Claiming to be the lawful occupant of the governor’s office, petitioner has brought this petition to exclude respondent therefrom. He argues that he was elected to said office for a term of six years, that he remains to be the governor of the province until his term expires on March 3, 1986 as provided by law, and that within the context of the parliamentary system, as in France, Great Britain and New Zealand, a local elective official can hold the position to which he had been elected and simultaneously be an elected member of Parliament.
Petitioner further contends that respondent Pacana should be considered to have abandoned or resigned from the position of vice-governor when he filed his certificate of candidacy for the 1984 Batas Pambansa elections; and since respondent had reverted to the status of a mere private citizen after he lost in the Batas Pambansa elections, he could no longer continue to serve as vice-governor, much less assume the office of governor.chanrobles.com:cralaw:red
1. The constitutional prohibition against a member of the Batasan Pambansa from holding any other office or employment in the government during his tenure is clear and unambiguous. Section 10, Article VIII of the 1973 Constitution provides as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"Section 10. A member of the National Assembly [now Batasan Pambansa] shall not hold any other office or employment in the government or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled corporations, during his tenure, except that of prime minister or member of the cabinet . . ."cralaw virtua1aw library
The language used in the above-cited section is plain, certain and free from ambiguity. The only exceptions mentioned therein are the offices of prime minister and cabinet member. The wisdom or expediency of the said provision is a matter which is not within the province of the Court to determine.
A public office is a public trust. 3 It is created for the interest and the benefit of the people. As such, a holder thereof "is subject to such regulations and conditions as the law may impose" and "he cannot complain of any restrictions which public policy may dictate on his holding of more than one office." 4 It is therefore of no avail to petitioner that the system of government in other states allows a local elective official to act as an elected member of the parliament at the same time. The dictate of the people in whom legal sovereignty lies is explicit. It provides no exceptions save the two offices specifically cited in the above-quoted constitutional provision. Thus, while it may be said that within the purely parliamentary system of government no incompatibility exists in the nature of the two offices under consideration, as incompatibility is understood in common law, the incompatibility herein present is one created by no less than the constitution itself. In the case at bar, there is no question that petitioner has taken his oath of office as an elected Mambabatas Pambansa and has been discharging his duties as such. In the light of the oft-mentioned constitutional provision, this fact operated to vacate his former post and he cannot now continue to occupy the same, nor attempt to discharge its functions.
2. The second proposition advanced by petitioner is that respondent Pacana, as a mere private citizen, had no right to assume the governorship left vacant by petitioner’s election to the Batasan Pambansa. He maintains that respondent should be considered as having abandoned or resigned from the vice-governorship when he filed his certificate of candidacy for the Batas Pambansa elections. The point pressed runs afoul of Batas Pambansa Blg. 697, the law governing the election of members of the Batasan Pambansa on May 14, 1984, Section 13[2] of which specifically provides that "governors, mayors, members of the various sangguniang or barangay officials shall, upon filing a certificate of candidacy, be considered on forced leave of absence from office." Indubitably, respondent falls within the coverage of this provision, considering that at the time he filed his certificate of candidacy for the 1984 Batasan Pambansa election he was a member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan as provided in Sections 204 and 205 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 337, 5 otherwise known as the Local Government Code. The reason the position of vice-governor was not included in Section 13[2] of BP Blg. 697 is explained by the following interchange between Assemblymen San Juan and Davide during the deliberations on said legislation:chanroblesvirtualawlibrary
"MR. DAVIDE. If I was able to get correctly the proposed amendment it would cover only governors and members of the different sangguniang? Mayor, governors?
MR. SAN JUAN. Governors, mayors, members of the various sanggunian or barangay officials. A vice-governor is a member of the Sanggunian Panlalawigan.
MR. DAVIDE. All. Why don’t we instead use the word, ‘Local official’?
MR. SAN JUAN. Well, Mr. Speaker, your humble representation.
MR. DAVIDE. And, secondly, why don’t we include the vice-governor, the vice-mayors?
MR. SAN JUAN. Because they are members of the Sanggunians, Mr. Speaker. They are covered by the provision on members of sanggunian." [Record of Proceedings, February 20, 1984, p. 92, Rollo].
Thus, when respondent reassumed the position of vice-governor after the Batas Pambansa elections, he was acting within the law. His succession to the governorship was equally legal and valid, the same being in accordance with Section 204[2] [a] of the same Local Government Code, which reads as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"SECTION 204. Powers, Duties and Privileges:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
1] . . .
2] He shall:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
a] Assume the office of the governor for the expired term of the latter in the cases provided for in Section 48, paragraph 1 6 of this Code;"
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is hereby dismissed. No costs.
Teehankee, Makasiar, Aquino, Concepcion, Jr., Melencio-Herrera, Plana, Relova, Gutierrez, Jr., De la Fuente, Cuevas and Alampay, JJ., concur.
Fernando, C.J. and Abad Santos, J., took no part.
Endnotes:
1. Exh. "7", Resp., p. 89, Rollo.
2. Exh. "8", Resp., p. 90, Rollo.
3. Sec. 1, Art. XIII, 1973 Constitution.
4. 42 Am. Jur. 926.
5. Section 204. Powers, Duties and Privileges:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
1] The vice-governor shall be an ex-officio member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan with all the rights, duties and privileges of any member thereof;.
Section 205. Composition:.
1] . . .
2] The Sangguniang Panlalawigan shall be composed of the governor, vice-governor, elective members of said sanggunians, and the president of the Katipunang Panlalawigan, etc. . . .
6. Section 48, par. 1, BP Blg. 337 reads:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
Sec. 48. Permanent Vacancy in the Office of the Governor, City or Municipal Mayor. — [1] In case a permanent vacancy arises when a governor, city or municipal mayor refuses to assume office, fails to qualify; dies, or is removed from office, voluntarily resigns or is otherwise permanently incapacitated to discharge the functions of his office, the vice-governor, city or municipal vice-mayor, as case may be, shall assume the office for the unexplained term of the former.
