Preventive Suspension1 exerting undue influence or pressure on the witnesses against him/her,

or
Section 25. Preventive Suspension, nature. –Preventive suspension tampering with evidence that may be used against him/her.
is not a penalty. It is designed merely as a measure of precaution so that C) In lieu of preventive suspension, for the same purpose, the proper
the official or employee charged may be removed from the scene of disciplining authority or head of office, may reassign respondent to other
his/her alleged misfeasance/malfeasance/nonfeasance while the same unit of the agency during the formal hearings.
is being investigated.
Neri v. Garcia
Misfeasance Malfeasance Nonfeasance Prior notice and hearing is not required, such suspension not being a
-Negligence. Doing something either Neglect or refusal penalty but only a preliminary step in an administrative investigation.
-Failure to use the through ignorance, to do without If after such investigation, the charges are established and the person is
degree of care, skill inattention or malice sufficient excuse found guilty of acts, warranting his removal, then he is removed or
and diligence something that the officer to perform an act dismissed. This is the penalty.
which the had no legal right to do at which it was his
circumstances of all, as where he acts legal duty to Section 51. 2 Preventive Suspension. - The proper disciplining authority
the case may without any authority, perform. may preventively suspend any subordinate officer or employee under his
reasonably exceeds, ignores, or authority pending an investigation, if the charge against such officer or
demand abuses his power. employee involves dishonesty, oppression or grave misconduct, or
neglect in the performance of duty, or if there are reasons to believe that
the respondent is guilty of charges which would warrant his removal from
Section 26. When Issued; Grounds. – Upon petition of the complainant the service.
or motu proprio, the proper disciplining authority may issue an order of
preventive suspension upon service of the formal charge or notice of Section 51 nowhere states or implies that before a preventive
charge/s, or immediately thereafter to any subordinate officer or suspension may issue, there must be proof that the subordinate may
employee under his/her authority pending an investigation, if unduly influence the witnesses against him or may tamper with the
A) The charge involves: documentary evidence on file in her office.
Dishonesty;
Oppression; Before an order of preventive suspension pending investigation
Grave Misconduct; may be validly issued, only two prerequisites may be shown:
Neglect in the Performance of Duty; 1. Proper disciplining authority has served a formal charge
Administrative offenses which are punishable by dismissal from the 2.Charge involves dishonesty, oppression or grave misconduct,
service on its second or third offense; or or neglect in the performance of duty, or if there are reasons to
If there are reasons to believe that the respondent is guilty of charges believe that the respondent is guilty of charges, which would
which would warrant his/her removal from the service. warrant his removal from the service.
B) An order of preventive suspension may be issued to temporarily
remove the respondent from the scene of his/her misfeasance, The CSC Resolution No. 030502 considers an order null and void
malfeasance or nonfeasance to preclude the possibility of: without the two prerequisites.

Preventive suspension pending investigation is a measure intended to

1Except as otherwise indicated, the laws pertain to Revised Rules on
Admin Cases in the Civil Service,
http://www.csc.gov.ph/phocadownload/userupload/paio_guevarra/rraccs.
pdf
enable the disciplining authority to investigate charges against
2Revised Administrative Code,
https://www.lawphil.net/executive/execord/eo1987/eo_292_1987.html
respondent by preventing the latter from intimidating or in any way
influencing witnesses against him. It is a purpose, not a condition of
preventive suspension.
Section 27. Duration of Preventive Suspension. – Unless otherwise
provided for by law, the disciplining authority may place the respondent
under preventive suspension for a maximum period of ninety (90) days
in the case of national agencies or sixty (60) days in the case of local
government units. When the administrative case against an officer or
employee under preventive suspension is not finally decided by the
disciplining authority within the period of preventive suspension, he/she
shall be automatically reinstated in the service unless the delay in the
disposition of the case is due to the fault, negligence or petition of the
respondent, in which case, the period of delay shall not be included in
the counting of the period of preventive suspension. Any period of delay
caused by motions filed by the respondent shall be added to the period
of preventive suspension. Provided, that where the order of preventive
suspension is for a period less than the maximum period, the disciplining
authority undertakes to finish the formal investigation within the said
period and is precluded from imposing another preventive suspension.
Provided, further, that should the respondent be on authorized leave,
said preventive suspension shall be deferred or interrupted until such
time that said leave has been fully exhausted.
Sec. 63 Local Government Code…(b) Preventive suspension may be
imposed at any time after the issues are joined, when the evidence of
guilt is strong, and given the gravity of the offense, there is great
probability that the continuance in office of the respondent could
influence the witnesses or pose a threat to the safety and integrity of the
records and other evidence: Provided, That, any single preventive
suspension of local elective officials shall not extend beyond sixty (60)
days: Provided, further, That in the event that several administrative
cases are filed against an elective official, he cannot be preventively
suspended for more than ninety (90) days within a single year on the
same ground or grounds existing and known at the time of the first
suspension.
(c) Upon expiration of the preventive suspension, the suspended elective
official shall be deemed reinstated in office without prejudice to the
continuation of the proceedings against him, which shall be terminated
within one hundred twenty (120) days from the time he was formally
notified of the case against him. However, if the delay in the proceedings
of the case is due to his fault, neglect, or request, other than the appeal
duly filed, the duration of such delay shall not be counted in computing
the time of termination of the case….
Section 24. Preventive Suspension. Ombudsman Act of 1989 — The
Ombudsman or his Deputy may preventively suspend any officer or
employee under his authority pending an investigation, if in his judgment
the evidence of guilt is strong, and (a) the charge against such officer or
employee involves dishonesty, oppression or grave misconduct or
neglect in the performance of duty; (b) the charges would warrant
removal from the service; or (c) the respondent's continued stay in office
may prejudice the case filed against him.
The preventive suspension shall continue until the case is terminated by
the Office of the Ombudsman but not more than six (6) months, without
pay, except when the delay in the disposition of the case by the Office of
the Ombudsman is due to the fault, negligence or petition of the
respondent, in which case the period of such delay shall not be counted
in computing the period of suspension herein provided.
Section 28. Remedies from the Order of Preventive Suspension. –
The respondent may file an appeal to the Commission within fifteen (15)
days from receipt thereof. Pending appeal, the same shall be executory.
A motion for reconsideration from the order of preventive suspension
shall not be allowed.
Section 29. Payment of Back Salaries During Preventive
Suspension. – The payment of back salaries during the period of
suspension shall be governed by the following:
a. A declaration by the Commission that an order of preventive
suspension is null and void on its face entitles the respondent official or
employee to immediate reinstatement and payment of back
salaries corresponding to the period of the unlawful preventive
suspension without awaiting the outcome of the main case.
The phrase “null and void on its face” in relation to a preventive
suspension order, imports any of the following circumstances:
i) The order was issued by one who is not authorized by law;
ii) The order was not premised on any of the conditions under Section
26 (A and B) of this Rule;
iii) The order of preventive suspension was issued without a formal
charge or notice of charges;
iv) While lawful in the sense that it is based on the enumerated grounds,
the duration of the imposed preventive suspension has exceeded the
prescribed periods, in which case the payment of back salaries shall
correspond to the excess period only.
b. A declaration of invalidity of a preventive suspension order not based
on any of the reasons enumerated in Section 29(a), shall result in the
reinstatement of the official or employee concerned. The payment of
back salaries shall, however, await the final outcome of the principal
case. If the official or employee is fully exonerated of the charge/s or
when the penalty imposed in the principal case is reprimand, he or she
shall be paid such back salaries. Otherwise, no back salaries shall be
awarded.
The phrase “full exoneration” contemplates a finding of not guilty for the
offense/s charged. Downgrading of the charge to a lesser offense shall
not be construed as “full exoneration” within the contemplation of these
guidelines.
Even if the respondent official or employee be eventually found innocent
of the charge/s proffered against him/her, the same shall not give rise to
payment of back salaries corresponding to the period of preventive
suspension in the absence of any finding of its illegality.
Preventive suspension pending investigation is not a penalty but
only a means of enabling the disciplining authority to conduct an
unhampered investigation.
On the other hand, preventive suspension pending appeal is actually
punitive although it is, in effect, subsequently considered illegal if
respondent is exonerated and the administrative decision finding him
guilty is reversed.
Effect: he should be reinstated with full pay for the period of suspension.
But if he is found guilty, the period of suspension becomes part of his
final penalty of suspension or dismissal. (Gloria v. CA (1999), but see
Quimbo v. Gervacio)
Since preventive suspension (PS) is not a penalty, the period within
which one is under PS is not considered part of the actual penalty of
suspension. To rule otherwise would be to disregard sections 24 and 25
of Rule XIV Omnibus rules implementing the Administrative code, which
expressly provide that PS is not a punishment or penalty and such, it
shall not be considered part of the actual penalty of suspension.
(Quimbo v. Gervacio, 2005)
PS of civil service employees charged with dishonesty, oppression or
grave misconduct or neglect of duty is authorized under the CSC. It
cannot be considered as unjust even if the charges are dismissed so as
to justify the payment of salaries to the employee concerned.
The decision meting out the penalty of suspension or dismissal shall be
immediately executor and if respondent appeals, he shall be considered
as under PS if he prevails in the suit.
The payment of salaries was ordered in cases in which employees were
found to be innocent of the charges or their suspension was held to
unjustified because their dismissal was executed without a finding by the
Commissioner of CS that their dismissal was necessary to public
interest.
Back wages: compensation that should have been earned but not
collected because of unjust dismissal. Includes other monetary benefits
attached to the employee’s salary following the principle that an illegally
dismissed government employee who is later reinstated is entitled to all
rights and privileges that accrue to him by virtue of the office being held.
Eg. RATA, rice subsidy, meal allowance, etc.
No payment of back wages the employee is guilty. But nothing is
inconsistent with the reason for denying salaries for the period of PS
even if the employee is exonerated. His suspension is authorized by the
law and cannot be unjustified.
Prerequisites to be entitled to Backwages:
1. Employee must be found innocent of the charges
2. Suspension must be unjustified.
 The strict observance of this becomes important only if
the employee is not totally innocent of any
administrative infraction. Where the employee is
completely exonerated or acquitted based on the finding
of innocence, the second becomes subsumed in the
first.
 Applies when the employee did not commit the offense
charged or total exoneration or is found guilty of another
offense different from the offense charged.
An employee is considered under PS during the pendency of his appeal.
In the event he wins, his suspension is unjustified because PS should
not exceed 90D. Hence, the employee is entitled to full pay, which
should not exceed 5 years at the rate last received before the
suspension was imposed. Maximum is 5Y, not from termination to
reinstatement. The earnings received elsewhere is not deducted.
Beyond the fixed period authorized by law, the suspension is unjustified
and must be compensated.
Sec. 47 Admin Code An appeal shall not stop the decision from being
executory, and in case the penalty is suspension or removal, the
respondent shall be considered as having been under preventive
suspension during the pendency of the appeal in the event he wins an
appeal.
This provision does not support the claim for back salaries during this
period as the law itself authorizes its imposition so that its legality is
beyond question.
The mere reduction of the penalty on appeal does not entitle a
government employee to back salaries if he was not exonerated of the
charge against him.
GR: Being found liable for a lesser offense is not equivalent to
exoneration and hence not entitled to back pay.
Except: when the offense actually committed does not carry the penalty
of more than one month suspension. (Because one month suspension is
not subject to appeal).
Dismissal of the case against the officer will not suffice because
dismissal does not amount to acquittal. Acquittal is always based on the
merits, because evidence presented does not show guilt beyond
reasonable doubt.
The RPC rule that death of the accused pending appeal extinguishes
criminal and civil liability does not have relevance on admin cases.
Officer is not on trial, the claim for back wages is neither criminal nor a
civil liability.
Exception to the 5year maximum period of back wages
Garcia v. COA Chair, Macabuhay v. Manuel, Cristobal v. Melchor,
Tanala v. Legaspi
Employee was acquitted on a finding of innocence in the criminal case
based on the same acts on which he was dismissed and an executive
pardon was granted to him.
 Court granted him back wages from dismissal to termination
 He is considered never to have left his office for all legal
purposes.
DECISION
Section 44. When Case is Decided. – The disciplining authority shall
decide the case within thirty (30) days from receipt of the Formal
Investigation Report.
Section 45. Finality of Decisions. – A decision rendered by the
disciplining authority whereby a penalty of suspension for not more than
thirty (30) days or a fine in an amount not exceeding thirty (30) days’
salary is imposed, shall be final, executory and not appealable unless a
motion for reconsideration is seasonably filed. However, the respondent
may file an appeal when the issue raised is violation of due process.
If the penalty imposed is suspension exceeding thirty (30) days, or fine in
an amount exceeding thirty (30) days’ salary, the same shall be final and
executory after the lapse of the reglementary period for filing a motion for
reconsideration or an appeal and no such pleading has been filed.
GR: Forfeiture of leave benefits is not imposed by the rules. Hence,
despite the imposition of the penalty of dismissal, leave benefits are not
forfeited.
Except: When the penalty of dismissal can no longer be imposed
because officer has applied for disability retirement. In lieu of dismissal,
this benefit shall be forfeited.
Section 50. Penalty for the Most Serious Offense. – If the respondent
is found guilty of two (2) or more charges or counts, the penalty to be
imposed should be that corresponding to the most serious charge and
the rest shall be considered as aggravating circumstances.
Dishonesty is graver than gross neglect of duty.
Appeals
Section 56. Filing. – The party adversely affected by the decision may
file a motion for reconsideration with the disciplining authority who
rendered the same within fifteen (15) days from receipt thereof. A motion
for extension of time to file a motion for reconsideration is not allowed.
Section 58. Grounds. – The motion for reconsideration shall be based
on any of the following:
1. New evidence has been discovered which materially affects the
decision rendered; or
2. The decision is not supported by the evidence on record; or
3. Errors of law or irregularities have been committed prejudicial to the
interest of the movant.
Section 59. Limitation. – Only one motion for reconsideration shall be
entertained. If a second motion for reconsideration is filed
notwithstanding its proscription under this Rules, the finality of action
shall be reckoned from the denial of the first motion for reconsideration.
Section 60. Effect of Filing. – The filing of a motion for reconsideration
within the reglementary period of fifteen (15) days shall stay the
execution of the decision sought to be reconsidered.
APPEAL IN DISCIPLINARY CASES
Section 61. Filing. – Subject to Section 45 of this Rules, decisions of
heads of departments, agencies, provinces, cities, municipalities and
other instrumentalities imposing a penalty exceeding thirty (30) days
suspension or fine in an amount exceeding thirty (30) days salary, may
be appealed to the Commission within a period of fifteen (15) days from
receipt thereof. In cases the decision rendered by a bureau or office
head is appealable to the Commission, the same may be initially
appealed to the department head and then finally to the Commission.
All decisions of heads of agencies are immediately executory pending
appeal before the Commission. The decision imposing the penalty of
dismissal by disciplining authorities in departments is not immediately
executory unless confirmed by the Secretary concerned. However, the
Commission may take cognizance of the appeal pending confirmation of
its execution by the Secretary.
Who may appeal the decision of the CA acquitting an officer to the
SC? It is the CSC who has become the party adversely affected by such
ruling, which seriously prejudices the CSC. Prior decisions holding that
the CS Law does not contemplate a review of decisions exonerating
officers or employees from admin charges are now overruled. (CSC v.
Dacoycoy)
CSC was limited to the review of the ff:
1. Suspension for more than 30D
2. Fine in an amount exceeding 30D
3. Demotion in rank or salary
4. Transfer, removal or dismissal from service
Nothing in the above indicates a legislative intent to bar appeals from
decisions exonerating a government official or an employee from an
administrative charge. Battles against corruption, malfeasance or
misfeasance will be seriously undermined if we bar appeals for
exoneration. Our new Constitution expressly expanded the range judicial
review. (Huertas v. Gonzales)
 But a private complainant is a mere government witness without a
right to appeal. He is not the party adversely affected by the decision
so that he has no personality to interpose an appeal. No private
interest is involved in an administrative case committed against the
government. Only respondent is qualified as “party adversely
affected” ad allowed to appeal.
 The government party that can appeal is not the disciplining
authority, which previously heard the case and imposed penalty, but
the prosecuting party. The disciplining authority, instead of becoming
impartial becomes an active participant.
*Main doctrine: the CSC has standing as a real party in interest and can
appeal the CA’s decision modifying or reversing CSC’s rulings , when
the CA action would have an adverse impact on the integrity of the civil
service. CSC has a stake in ensuring that proper disciplinary action is
imposed on an erring public employee.
A decision imposing a penalty less than demotion or dismissal from
service is final and executor does not apply to dismissal of charges or
exoneration because they are not disciplinary actions.
CSC Law also applies to PNP Members.
Section 65. Effect of Filing. – Except for cases requiring confirmation
of the Department Secretary concerned and cases decided by the
CSCROs, an appeal shall not stop the decision from being executory.
Section 65. Effect of Filing. – Except for cases requiring confirmation
of the Department Secretary concerned and cases decided by the
CSCROs, an appeal shall not stop the decision from being executory.
Section 69. Petition for Review of Decisions of Agencies. – A
decision of an agency head dismissing a complaint for lack of prima
facie case or issuance of a formal charge for a lower offense is not
subject to appeal or petition for review before the Commission.
Section 70. Petition for Review with the Court of Appeals. – A party
may elevate a decision of the Commission before the Court of Appeals
by way of a petition for review under Rule 43 of the 1997 Revised Rules
of Court.
Neither Admin Code nor CSC rules deprives courts of their power to
grant restraining orders or preliminary injunctions to stay the execution of
CSC decisions pending appeal.
GR: An order of execution is not appealable; otherwise, a case
would never end.
Except: (Remedy is appeal by SCA of certiorari, prohibition or
mandamus)
1. The writ of execution varies the judgment.
2. There has been a change in the situation of the parties making
execution inequitable or unjust
3. Execution is sought to be enforced against property exempt from
execution
4. It appears that the controversy has been submitted to the judgment of
the court
5. The terms of the judgment are not clear enough and there remains
room for interpretation thereof
6. It appears that the writ of execution has been improvidently issued or
defective in substance, or issued against the wrong party,
7. The judgment debt has been paid or satisfied
8. Writ is issued without authority.
If suspension exceeds 30D or the fine imposed is an amount over 30D
salary, the decision will only attain finality after the lapse of the
reglementary period in the absence of any MR or appeal. Penalties
within the 30D threshold are immediately executor penalties.
It is only the decision of the Commission Proper that may be brought to
the CA on petition for review. Non-observance of the hierarchy will result
to violation of the principle of exhaustion of administrative remedies.
Back to Constitutional Provisions:
Art. IX(b) Sec. 2(4) No officer or employee in the civil service shall
engage, directly or indirectly, in any electioneering or partisan
political campaign.
Reason: Public officers and employees in the Civil Service are servants
of the State and not the agents of any political group.
Scope: Covers only civil servants holding apolitical offices.
The prohibition extends to the members of the AFP.
But does not cover those elected into public office because the nature of
their office requires them to engage in partisan political activities even
outside the campaign period.
Partisan political activity under the Election Code
1. Forming organizations, associations, clubs, committees, or other
groups of persons for the purpose of soliciting votes and/or undertaking
any campaign for or against a candidate
2. Holding political caucuses, conferences, meetings, rallies, parades, or
other similar assemblies, for the purpose of soliciting votes and/or
undertaking any campaign or propaganda for or against a candidate.
3. Making speeches, announcements or commentaries, or holding
interviews for or against the election of any candidate for public office.
4. Publishing or distributing campaign literature or materials designed to
support or oppose the election of candidate
5. Directly or indirectly soliciting votes, pledges, or support for or against
a candidate.
Submitting a nomination list is not among the enumerations above.
Civil service employees are allowed to vote and express their views on
political issues or mention names of candidates for public office whom
they support.
Art. IX(b) Sec. 2 (5) The right to self-organization shall not be
denied to government employees.
Are the employees of the SSS covered by the prohibition against
strikes? Yes.
1. The civil service embraces all branches, subdivisions,
instrumentalities, and agencies of the Government, including GOCCs
with original charters.
2. SSS is a GOCC having an original charter, having been created under
RA 1161. (SSS Employees Association v. CA)
Government employees may, through their unions, either petition the
Congress for the betterment of the terms and conditions of employment,
which are within the ambit of legislation or negotiate with the appropriate
government agencies for the improvement of those, which are not fixed
by law. Unresolved grievances may be referred to the Public Sector
Labor-Management Council for appropriate action. But they may not
resort to strikes, walk-outs and other temporary work stoppages, like
workers in the private sector, to pressure the Government to accede to
their demands.
Government workers, whatever their ranks, have as much rights as any
person in the land to voice out their protests against what they believe to
be a violation of their rights and interests.
Concerted activity or mass action done outside of government office
hours shall not be deemed a prohibited concerted activity. What is
prohibited is that the collectivity activity causes work stoppage or service
disruption. Time and place are not determinative of the prohibition. It is
allowed if is without intent at work stoppage, whether done within
government hours.
Art. IX(b) Sec. 2 (6) Temporary employees of the Government shall
be given such protection as may be provided by law.
All government employees who have rendered at least seven years of
efficient service may be granted the civil service eligibility.
SECTION 3. The Civil Service Commission, as the central personnel
agency of the Government, shall establish a career service and
adopt measures to promote morale, efficiency, integrity,
responsiveness, progressiveness, and courtesy in the civil service.
It shall strengthen the merit and rewards system, integrate all
human resources development programs for all levels and ranks,
and institutionalize a management climate conducive to public
accountability. It shall submit to the President and the Congress an
annual report on its personnel programs.
CSC, as the central personnel agency of the government, has the power
to appoint and discipline its officials and employees and to hear and
decide admin cases instituted by or brought before it directly or on
appeal.
Its rule making power is limited to the implementation and interpretation
of the laws it is tasked to enforce. It is constitutionally granted. But this
power is made to depend on statues that Congress may withdraw. While
this power is untouchable by Congress, the laws that the CSC interprets
and enforces fall within the prerogative of the Congress. Its rules must
not override, but must be in harmony with the law it seeks to apply and
implement. It is still an administrative body and hence subject to the
same rules.
SECTION 4. All public officers and employees shall take an oath or
affirmation to uphold and defend this Constitution.
SECTION 5. The Congress shall provide for the standardization of
compensation of government officials and employees, including
those in government-owned or controlled corporations with
original charters, taking into account the nature of the
responsibilities pertaining to, and the qualifications required for
their positions.
A salary is not an essential element of public office. While it is granted by
statute, it may be withdrawn by statute. One does not have a vested
right to salary. It is subject to change by the legislature except if
constitutionally granted. The officer cannot invoke due process because
a salary is not a property right.
BUT: no reduction or abolition of salary can operate retroactively to
affect salaries already earned or accrued. These are vested rights. To be
valid, the law should have a prospective effect only.
An appointment issued in accordance with pertinent laws and rules shall
take effect immediately upon issuance and if the appointee has assumed
office, he is entitled to salary even without the approval of his
appointment by the Commission.
A public officer is not entitled to any compensation if he has not rendered
any office.
Directors of water districts are authorized to receive only per diem
authorized by law and no other compensation or allowance in whatever
form. No other compensation or allowance in whatever form shall be
given to them. They are not covered under the Salary Standardization
Law because their functions are limited to policy making.
In cases where there is no de jure officer, a de facto officer, who, in good
faith has had possession of the office and has discharged the duties
pertaining thereto, is legally entitled to the emoluments of the office, and
may in an appropriate action recover the salary, fees and other
compensations attached to the office. Grounded on equity.
Where there is a an express provision of law prohibiting the grant of
certain benefits, the law must be enforced even if it prejudices certain
parties on account of an error committed by public officials in granting
the benefit.
Salaries under the Constitution:
1. Art.VI, sec. 10: Senators and members of the HR
2. Art. VII, sec. 6: President and VP
3. Art. VIII, sec. 10: Justices of the SC
4. Art. IX-A, sec. 3: Chairmen and Commissioners
5. Art. X, sec. 3: Local government officials
6. Art. XI, sec. 10: Omb + Deputies
 Common provision to the above mentioned: Their salaries shall
be fixed by law.
7. Art. XVIII, sec. 17
SECTION 6. No candidate who has lost in any election shall, within
one year after such election, be appointed to any office in the
Government or any government-owned or controlled corporations
or in any of their subsidiaries.
Note the disqualification with respect with respect to appointment of
constitutional commissioner: must not have been candidates for any
elective position in the elections immediately preceding their
appointment.

SECTION 7. No elective official shall be eligible for appointment or

designation in any capacity to any public office or position during
his tenure.
Unless otherwise allowed by law or by the primary functions of his
position, no appointive official shall hold any other office or
employment in the Government or any subdivision, agency or
instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled
corporations or their subsidiaries.

Elective officials can be appointed or designated to other public offices

or positions during their term. They would, upon appointment, be
considered as having forfeited their elective posts.

Paragraph 2 is not applicable to ff. by reason that they are allowed

to hold offices only if allowed under the Constitution.
1. President
2.VP
3. Members of the cabinet and their deputies or assistants
The concurrent appointments of PCGG Chair and CPLC are
unconstitutional. These are incompatible offices. The duties of the CPLC
include giving independent and impartial legal advice on the actions of
the heads of various executive departments and agencies and reviewing
investigation involving heads of executive departments. PCGG Chair’s
actions are subject to review of the CPLC.

A punong barangay, whose responsibilities do not require his time to be

fully at the disposal of the government, can engage in the private
practice of law only with the written permission of the head of the
department concerned.

Laurel was occupying positions of Acting Provincial Administrator and

Senior Executive Asst. in the Office of the Governor. He was promoted
as Civil Security Officer. Both non-career. Void promotion. The law
provides that no person appointed to a position in the non career shall
perform duties that are career services.