CONSTITUTIONAL

COMMISSION
CIVIL SERVICE
COMMISSION

ABOLITION OF OFFICE

Q: Can abolition of office violate security of tenure?

While abolition of office does not imply

removal of the incumbent officer, this
is true only where the abolition of
office is done in good faith and not
merely as a cover for a removal
otherwise
not
allowed
by
the
Constitution.

ABOLITION OF OFFICE

To escape the taint of Unconstitutionality, it

must be made:

1.In good faith;

2.Not for personal or
political reasons; and
3.Not in violation of the
law.

ABOLITION OF OFFICE

Even if it is arising from reorganization

mandated by law, it must be justified by
good faith and public need. (Blaquera v. CSC,
GR# 95773)

Moreover, abolition of an office created by

law can only be done also by law. (Eugenio v.
CSC, GR# 115863)

ABOLITION OF OFFICE

Q: Sec. 35 of RA 6715 declared all positions of

the Commissioners, Executive Labor Arbiters and
Labor Arbiters of the present NLRC vacant. Is it
Constitutional?

A: Unconstitutional. While abolition by law as a

result of reorganization is a recognized cause for
termination of a Government employee, it is not
the same as a declaration that the office is
vacant. RA 6715 has effected no express
abolition of the positions, neither an implied
abolition. (Mayor v. Hon. Macaraig, GR#87211)

ABOLITION OF OFFICE

Q: Does the President have the authority

to reorganize the Executive Department?

A: Yes. This can include deactivation of

offices. The Presidents power of control
may justify him to inactivate the
functions of a particular office, or certain
laws may grant him the broad authority to
carry out reorganization measures.
(Buklod ng Kawaning EIIB v. Executive
Secretary, GR# 142801-802)

ABOLITION OF OFFICE

An officer who is simply given a

reprimand is not exenorated.

Temporary Appointees are not

protected by the guarantee of
security of tenure and may be
removed anytime even without
cause.

WHAT IS A PARTISAN POLITICAL

CAMPAIGN?

Partisan Political Activity, which is the phrase used

in previous Constitution, includes every form of
solicitation of the electors vote in favor of a
specific candidate. (People v. de Venecia, 14
SCRA 864, 867)

It includes contribution of money for election

purposes and distribution of handbills. However,
the
provision
does
not
prevent
any
officer/employee from expressing his views on
current political issues, or from mentioning the
names of candidates for public office whom he
supports. (Sec. 29, RA 2260)

PARTISAN POLITICAL CAMPAIGN

The prohibition does not include Department

Secretaries.

NOTE: As long as the acts embraced under

SEC. 79 pertain to or are in connection with
the nomination of a candidate by a party
organization, then such are treated as internal
matters and cannot be considered as
electioneering or partisan political activity.
The twin acts of signing and filing a
Certificate of Nomination are purely internal
processes of the party or organization and are
not designed to enable or ensure the victory
of the candidate in the elections.

RIGHT TO ORGANIZE

Q: May the members of the Civil Service

unionize?

A: Yes. Article III, Section 8, Section 2(5) and

Article XIII, Section 3 of our Constitution
guarantees this right.

However, their right to strike may be limited

by law.

SECTION 3, ARTICLE IX B
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.

SECTION 3, ARTICLE 9 B

Q: What is the purpose if a civil service system?

A: The general objective of a civil service system

is to establish and promote professionalism and
efficiency in public service.

* Q: When there is more than one person qualified

for a position, may the Civil Service Commission
dictate to the appointing authority who among
those qualified should be appointed?
* A: No. The power of the Commission is limited to
attesting to the eligibility or ineligibility of the
appointee. (Secretary Orbos v. CSC, GR #92561)

SECTION 3, ARTICLE 9 B
* Q: What jurisdiction does the Civil Service
Commission have over personnel cases given by
statute to the jurisdiction of the Merit Systems
Board?
* A: It has only automatic review jurisdiction, not
original jurisdiction (GSIS v CSC, GR #87146)

Q: May the Commission Revoke a certificate of eligibility?

A: As central personnel agency of the government, the

CSC may revoke a certificate of eligibility motu proprio.
The power to issue a certificate of eligibility carries with
it the power to revoke one that has been given.

SECTION 4, 5, 6
ARTICLE 9 (B)

SECTION 6, ARTICLE 9 B
Q: What is the purpose of the prohibition of
appointment of lame ducks in Section 6.
A: Its purpose is the extirpation of the spoils
system.
One who is under the one year prohibition imposed
on losing candidates is disqualified from being
appointed during that one year period even if he or
she has the other qualifications.

SECTION 7, ARTICLE IX B
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.

SECTION 7, ARTICLE 9 B

Q: Are there exceptions to the rule against

appointment of elective officials?

A: Yes. The Vice-President may be appointed

member of the Cabinet. A member of Congress is
designated to sit in the Judicial and Bar Council.

Q: May the Congress by law authorize the

appointment of elective officials?

A: No. the provision prohibits elective officials

other than members of the Congress from
accepting appointment during their tenure. If
the elective official accepts an appointment
without first resigning his elective position, the
appointment is invalid.

SECTION 8, ARTICLE IX B
No elective or appointive public officer or
employee shall receive additional, double, or
indirect compensation, unless specifically
authorized by law, nor accept without the
consent of the Congress, any present,
emolument, office, or title of any kind from
any foreign government.
Pensions or gratuities shall not be considered as
additional, double, or indirect compensation.

SECTION 8, ARTICLE 9 B
Q: What is the purpose of the prohibition of
additional or double compensation?

A: This is to manifest a commitment to the

fundamental principle that a public office is a
public trust. He is there to render public service
and is entitled to be rewarded of his efforts, but
that should not be the overriding consideration.

Q: What is additional or double compensation?

A: There is additional compensation when for

one and the same office, for which a
compensation has been fixed, there is something
added to such, like for instance, a bonus. This is
not allowed in the absence of a law specifically
authorizing such extra reward.

SECTION 8, ARTICLE 9 B

A:While, Double Compensation more properly

refers to two sets of compensation for two
different offices held concurrentky by one
officer.

Q: What is the meaning of the phrase specifically

authorized by law?

A: The authority required by the Constitution to

receive double or additional compensation is a
specific authority given to a particular employee
or officer of the Government because of peculiar
or exceptional reasons warranting the payment of
extra or additional compensation.