Rufino vs
Endriga
G.R. No.
139554
July 21,
2006
FACTS:
On 25 June 1966, then President
Ferdinand E. Marcos issued Executive Order No. 30 (EO 30) creating the Cultural
Center of the Philippines as a trust governed by a Board of Trustees of seven
members to preserve and promote Philippine culture.
On 5 October 1972, or soon after the declaration of Martial
Law, President Marcos issued PD 15, the CCP’s
charter, which converted the CCP under EO 30 into a non-municipal public
corporation free from the “pressure or influence of politics.” PD 15 increased
the members of CCP’s Board from seven to nine trustees. Later,
Executive Order No. 1058, issued on 10 October 1985, increased further the
trustees to 11.
After the People Power Revolution in 1986, then President Corazon
C. Aquino asked for the courtesy resignations of the then incumbent CCP
trustees and appointed new trustees to the Board. Eventually,
during the term of President Fidel V. Ramos, the CCP Board included Endriga,
Lagdameo, Sison, Potenciano, Fernandez,
Lenora A. Cabili (“Cabili”), and Manuel T. Mañosa
(“Mañosa”).
On 22
December 1998, then President Joseph E. Estrada appointed seven new trustees to
the CCP Board for a term of four years to replace the Endriga group as well as
two other incumbent trustees. The seven new trustees were:
1. Armita B.
Rufino - President,
vice Baltazar
N. Endriga
2. Zenaida
R.
Tantoco - Member,
vice Doreen Fernandez
3. Federico
Pascual - Member,
vice Lenora A. Cabili
4. Rafael
Buenaventura - Member, vice
Manuel T. Mañosa
5. Lorenzo
Calma - Member,
vice Ma. Paz D. Lagdameo
6. Rafael Simpao,
Jr. - Member,
vice Patricia C. Sison
7. Freddie
Garcia - Member,
vice Irma Ponce-Enrile
Potenciano
Except for Tantoco, the Rufino
group took their respective oaths of office
and assumed the performance of their duties in early January 1999.
On 6 January 1999, the Endriga group filed a petition
for quo warranto before this Court questioning President
Estrada’s appointment of seven new members to the CCP
Board. The Endriga group alleged that under Section 6(b) of PD 15,
vacancies in the CCP Board “shall be filled by election by a vote of a majority
of the trustees held at the next regular meeting x x x.” In
case “only one trustee survive[s], the vacancies shall be filled by the
surviving trustee acting in consultation with the ranking officers of the
[CCP].” The Endriga group claimed that it is only when the CCP Board
is entirely vacant may the President of the Philippines fill such vacancies,
acting in consultation with the ranking officers of the CCP.
The Endriga group asserted that
when former President Estrada appointed the Rufino group, only one seat was
vacant due to the expiration of Mañosa’s term. The CCP Board then
had 10 incumbent trustees.
The Endriga group refused to accept that the CCP was under the
supervision and control of the President. The Endriga group cited
Section 3 of PD 15, which states that the CCP “shall enjoy autonomy of policy
and operation x x x.”
On 14 May 1999, the Court of Appeals granted the quo
warranto petition. The Court of Appeals declared the
Endriga group lawfully entitled to hold office as CCP trustees. On
the other hand, the appellate court’s Decision ousted the Rufino group from
the CCP Board.
In their motion for reconsideration, the Rufino group asserted
that the law could only delegate to the CCP Board the power to appoint officers
lower in rank than the trustees of the Board. The law may not
validly confer on the CCP trustees the authority to appoint or elect their
fellow trustees, for the latter would be officers of equal rank and not
of lower rank. Section 6(b) of PD 15 authorizing the CCP
trustees to elect their fellow trustees should be declared unconstitutional
being repugnant to Section 16, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution allowing
the appointment only of “officers lower in rank” than the appointing
power.
On 3 August 1999, the Court of Appeals denied the Rufino
group’s motion for reconsideration. The Court of Appeals also denied
the Endriga group’s motion for immediate execution of the 14 May
1999 Decision.
Hence, the instant consolidated petitions.
ISSUE:
Whether or
not Sec. 6 (b) of PD 15 is constitutional and CCP trustees have the authority
to appoint and elect their fellow trustees when there is vacancy.
RULING:
NO. The SC
ruled that Sec. 6 (b) and (c) of PD 15 as amended which authorizes the remaining trustees to
fill by election vacancies in the Board of Trustees of CCP is unconstitutional.
Section 6(b) and (c) of PD 15, which authorizes the trustees of
the CCP Board to fill vacancies in the Board, runs afoul with the President’s
power of control under Section 17, Article VII of the 1987
Constitution. The intent of Section 6(b) and (c) of PD 15 is
to insulate the CCP from political influence and pressure, specifically from
the President. Section 6(b) and (c) of PD 15 makes the CCP a
self-perpetuating entity, virtually outside the control of the President. Such
a public office or board cannot legally exist under the 1987
Constitution.
Section 3 of PD 15, as amended, states that the CCP “shall enjoy
autonomy of policy and operation x x x.” This provision does not
free the CCP from the President’s control, for if it does, then it would be
unconstitutional. This provision may give the CCP Board a free hand
in initiating and formulating policies and undertaking activities, but
ultimately these policies and activities are all subject to the President’s
power of control.
The CCP is part of the Executive branch. No law can cut off the
President’s control over the CCP in the guise of insulating the CCP from the
President’s influence. By stating that the “President shall have control
of all the executive x x x offices,” the 1987 Constitution empowers the
President not only to influence but even to control all
offices in the Executive branch, including the CCP. Control is
far greater than, and subsumes, influence.
No comments:
Post a Comment