Quasi-legislative power

It is the authority delegated by the law-making body to the administrative body to adopt rules
and regulations intended to carry out the provisions of a law and implement legislative policy.

Quasi-Judicial Power

It is the power of administrative authorities to make determinations of facts in the performance

of their official duties and to apply the law as they construe it to the facts so found. The exercise
of this power is only incidental to the main function of administrative authorities, which is the
enforcement of the law.

Determinative Powers
1. ENABLING powers

Those that PERMIT the doing of an act which the law undertakes to regulate and would be
unlawful without government approval.

Ex. Issuance of licenses to engage in a particular business.

2. DIRECTING powers
Those that involve the corrective powers of public utility commissions, powers of assessment
under the revenue laws, reparations under public utility laws, and awards under workmens
compensation laws, and powers of abstract determination such as definition-valuation,
classification and fact finding
3. DISPENSING powers
Exemplified by the authority to exempt from or relax a general prohibition, or authority to
relieve from an affirmative duty. Its difference from licensing power is that dispensing power
sanctions a deviation from a standard.
4. SUMMARY powers
Those that apply compulsion or force against person or property to effectuate a legal purpose
without a judicial warrant to authorize such action. Usually without notice and hearing.

Ex. Abatement of nuisance, summary restraint, levy of property of delinquent tax payers

5. EQUITABLE powers
Those that pertain to the power to determine the law upon a particular state of facts. It refers to
the right to, and must, consider and make proper application of the rules of equity
The right against self-incrimination is accorded to every person who gives evidence, whether
voluntary or under compulsion of subpoena, in any civil, criminal or administrative
proceeding. The right is not to be compelled to be a witness against himself. It secures to a
witness, whether he be a party or not, the right to refuse to answer any particular incriminatory
question, i.e., one the answer to which has a tendency to incriminate him for some
crime. However, the right can be claimed only when the specific question, incriminatory in
character, is actually put to the witness. It cannot be claimed at any other time. It does not give a
witness the right to disregard a subpoena, decline to appear before the court at the time
appointed, or to refuse to testify altogether. The witness receiving a subpoena must obey it,
appear as required, take the stand, be sworn and answer questions. It is only when a particular
question is addressed to which may incriminate himself for some offense that he may refuse to
answer on the strength of the constitutional guaranty.
Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies
1. Under this doctrine, an administrative decision must first be appealed to the
administrative superiors up to the highest level before it may be elevated to a court of
justice for review.
1. Reasons :
1. to enable the administrative superiors to correct the errors committed by
their subordinates.
2. courts should refrain from disturbing the findings of administrative. bodies
in deference to the doctrine of separation of powers.
3. courts should not be saddled with the review of administrative cases
4. judicial review of administrative cases is usually effected through special civil
actions which are available only if their is no other plain, speedy and adequate
remedy.

3. Exceptions

a. when the question raised is purely legal, involves constitutional questions

b. when the administrative body is in estopped
c. when act complained of is patently illegal
d. when there is urgent need for judicial intervention
e. when claim involved is small
f. when irreparable damage is involved
g. when there is no other plain, speedy , adequate remedy
h. when strong public interest is involved
I. when the subject of controversy is private land
1. in quo warranto proceedings
2. When the administrative remedy is permissive, concurrent
3. utter disregard of due process
4. long-continued and unreasonable delay
5. amount involved is relatively small
6. when no administrative review is provided
 7. respondent is a department secretary (DOCTRINE OF QUALIFIED POLITICAL
AGENCY ALTER EGO DOCTRINE)

Substantial evidence defined to mean not necessarily preponderant proof as required in

ordinary civil cases but such kind of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as
adequate to support a conclusion.

Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions

Judicial review is defined as the process by which courts examine the actions of the three wings
of the government i.e., legislative, executive, and administrative wings. It also determines
whether such actions are consistent with the constitution of the country.

The function of judicial review of agency action is to determine:

The authority of the agency;

Compliance by the agency with appropriate procedural requirements;

Whether an agency action is arbitrary, capricious or an abuse of discretion.[i]

Thus, judicial review ensures that an essentially fair process is employed by an agency,
invalidating only those actions in which governmental regularity has lapsed into mere will.[ii]

The Administrative Procedure Act provides for comprehensive judicial review of agency actions.
Any person adversely affected or aggrieved by agency action is entitled to judicial review as long
as the action is a final agency action for which there is no other adequate remedy in a court.[iii]

In Yeboah v. INS, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17360 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 26, 2001), it was observed that
there are three criteria by which courts consider while deciding whether action of an agency is
reviewable:

Firstly, the agency must have broad discretionary powers.

Secondly, courts have to consider whether the action implicates any political, military,
economic, or other choices not essentially legal in nature and, thus, whether the action is not
readily susceptible to judicial review.

Thirdly, even actions committed to agency discretion by law are reviewable on grounds
that the agency lacked jurisdiction, decision of the agency resulted from impermissible
influences or such decision violates any constitutional, statutory, or regulatory command.
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/category/administrative-
law/https://administrativelaw.uslegal.com/judicial-review-of-administrative-
decisions/http://attylaserna.blogspot.com/2013/10/right-against-self-incrimination.html
PUBLIC OFFICE

An office created by a constitution or legislative act, having a definite tenure, and

involving the power to carry out some governmental function

Right, authority, duty, created and conferred by law, by which for a given period, either fixed by law or enduring at
the pleasure of the creating power, an individualist invested with some sovereign power of government to be
exercised by him forth benefit of the people.

Public officer. : A person who has been legally elected or appointed to office and who exercises
governmental functions.

A person who holds office

-Public Officer, as understood under criminal law

Article 203. any person who, by direct provision of law, popular election or appointment by competent authority
shall take part in the performance of public functions in the Government; or shall perform in said Government
public duties as am employee, agent, or subordinate official of any rank or class, shall be deemed to be a public
officer.

I. ELIGIBILITY AND QUALIFICATIONS

Qualifications2 Different Senses:1.

endowments, qualities, attributes which make an individual eligible for public office must possess at the time of the
appointment/election and continuously for as long as the official relationship exists2.

act of entering into the performance of the functions of public office

Property qualifications may not be imposed for the exercise of the right to run for public office.

Loss of any of the qualifications during incumbency will be a ground for termination.

Failure of an officer to perform an act required by law could affect the officers title to the given office.

Prolonged failure or refusal to take the oath of office could result in forfeiture of the office.
BP 881 the office of any official ELECTED who fails or refuses to take his oath of office within 6 months from
his proclamation shall be considered vacant UNLESS failure is for a cause/s beyond his control.

Oath of office is a qualifying requirement for public office.

Until he is qualified, the holdover officer is the rightful occupant.

Oath of office taken before one who has no authority to administer oath, is no oath at all.

Pendency of election protest is not sufficient basis to enjoin him from assuming office or from discharging his
functions

Disqualifications

Authority

Legislature has the right to prescribe disqualifications in the same manner as it can prescribe qualifications.

Limitation: do not violate the Constitution

Disqualification may be because of unfitness for public office or because the person is rendered ineligible for the
office

General Disqualifications under the Constitution1.

No candidate who lost in an election, shall, within 1 year after such election, be appointed to any office in the
Government.2.

No elective official shall be eligible for appointment or designation in any capacity to any public office or position
during his tenure.3.

No appointive official shall hold any other position in the Government, unless otherwise allowed by law or the
primary functions of his office

DE FACTO OFFICERS
-Reputation of being an officer and yet is not a good officer in point of law.
-Acted as an officer for such length of time under color of title and under such circumstances of reputation or
acquiescence by the public and public authorities as to afford a presumption of election/appointment and induce
people to submit to or invoke his action
-Those that affect the public are valid, binding and with full legal effect.
-For the protection of the public

Elements
1. Validly existing public office
2. Actual physical possession of said office
3. Color of title to the office.
A. by reputation/acquiescence.
B. known and valid appointment/election but officer failed to conform to a requirement imposed by law.
C. known appointment or election, void (though unknown to public) because:
I. Ineligibility of officer
ii. Want of authority of appointing/electing authority
iii. Irregularity in appointment/election.
D. known appointment/election pursuant to unconstitutional law, before law was declared
unconstitutional.

V. POWERS AND DUTIES OF PUBLIC OFFICERS

Authority of Public Officers
1. Expressly conferred upon him by the ACT appointing him
2. Expressly ANNEXED to the office by LAW
3. Attached to the office by COMMON LAW as incidents to it
4. Doctrine of Necessary Implication all powers necessary for the effective exercise of the express powers

Authority can be exercised only during the term when the public officer, is by law, invested with the rights and
duties of the office. Ministerial and Discretionary Powers

1. Ministerial discharge by officer is imperative and requires neither judgment nor discretion; exercise of which
may be compelled
2. Discretionary imposed by law upon a public officer; officer has the right to decide how and when the duty
shall be performed; mandamus will not lie to compel performance
Exception: when mandamus will lie:
1. GAD
2. Manifest injustice
3. Palpable excess of authority equivalent to a denial of settled rights
4. No other plain, speedy or adequate remedy

Writ may issue to compel the exercise of discretion but not the discretion itself
 Courts may review exercise of discretion, to determine if there has been GAD amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction

Judgment judicial functions; determination of a question of law; only one way to be right

Discretion, may decide the question either way and still be right; limited to the evident purpose of the act

Duties of Public Officer Constitutional Duties

To be accountable to the people

To serve them with utmost responsibility, loyalty and efficiency
To act with patriotism and justice
To lead modest lives
To submit a declaration under oath of his assets, liabilities and net worth upon assumption of office and as often as
may be required
To owe the State and Constitution allegiance at all times
*SOLGEN represent government and its offices EXCEPT criminal cases and civil cases for damages arising
from felony
VI. LIABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
General Rule on Liability
A public officer is not liable for injuries sustained by another as a consequence of official acts done within the
scope of his official authority, except as otherwise provided by law.
Not civilly liable for acts done in official capacity UNLESS bad faith, malice, negligence
Liable for willful or negligent acts done by him which are contrary to morals, law public policy and good
customs EVEN if he acted under instructions of his superiors.
Local governments are not exempt from liabilities for DEATH or INJURY to persons or DAMAGE to property.
Statutory Liability
Article 27, CC refuses or neglects without just cause to perform his official duty, whereby a person suffers
moral or material loss; without prejudice to administrative disciplinary sanction
Article 32, CC liability of public officer for violation of constitutional rights
Article 34, CC liability of peace officer who fails to respond or give assistance to persons in danger of injury to
life or property
w/o just cause. Neglects to perform a duty within a period fixed by law or regulation or within a reasonable period
if none is fixed
Liability on Contracts
personally
Entered without or exceeded his authority
Liability for Tort
personally
Beyond the scope of his authority or exceeds power conferred upon him; ultra vires or where there is bad faith
Presidential Immunity from Suit
during tenure of the President
After his tenure, cannot invoke immunity from suit for civil damages arising out of acts done by him, while he
was president which were not performed in the exercise of official duties.
Not prevented from instituting suit.

Threefold Liability Rule

Wrongs acts or omissions of a public officer may give rise to civil, criminal and administrative liability.
Action for each can proceed independently
Dismissal of one does not foreclose action for others--difference in quantum of evidence
Liability of Ministerial Officers
1. Nonfeasance neglect or refusal to perform an act which is the officers legal obligation
2. Misfeasance failure to exercise that degree of care, skill and diligence in the performance of official duty
3. Malfeasance doing, through ignorance, inattention or malice of an act which he had no legal right to perform.
Command Responsibility
Head of a department or a superior officer shall not be civilly liable for the wrongful acts, omission of duty,
negligence or misfeasance of his subordinates, UNLESS he has actually authorized by written order the specific
act or misconduct
VII. RIGHTS OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
1. Right to Office
2. Right to Salary
3. Right to Preference in Promotion
4. Right to Vacation and Sick Leave
5. Right to Maternity Leave
6. Right to Retirement Pay
7. Right to reimbursement for expenses incurred in due performance of duty
8. Right to be indemnified against any liability
9. Right to longevity pay
VIII. TERMINATION OF OFFICIAL RELATIONSHIP
Modes of Terminating Official Relationship
1. Expiration of term or tenure
2. Reaching the age limit
3. Resignation
4. Recall
5. Removal
6. Abandonment
7. Acceptance of an Incompatible Office
8. Abolition of Office
9. Prescription of the Right to Office
10. Impeachment
11. Death
12. Failure to Assume Elective Office w/in 6 months from proclamation
13. Conviction of a Crime
14. Filing of Certificate of Candidacy

https://www.scribd.com/doc/17150173/Nachura-Notes-Public-Officers