Scribd
Upload
365 views1 page

Unconstitutionality of Yorac's Appointment

The petitioner challenged the designation of Associate Commissioner Haydee B. Yorac as Acting Chairman of the Commission on Elections by the President of the Philippines, arguing that the choice of an acting chairman is an internal matter that should be decided by the commission members themselves. The court ruled the presidential designation unconstitutional, finding that the Constitution establishes commissions as independent bodies not under the control of the president. As independent bodies, the commissions have discretion to choose an acting chairman on their own according to their own rules and procedures.

Uploaded by

Jestherin Baliton
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
365 views1 page

Unconstitutionality of Yorac's Appointment

The petitioner challenged the designation of Associate Commissioner Haydee B. Yorac as Acting Chairman of the Commission on Elections by the President of the Philippines, arguing that the choice of an acting chairman is an internal matter that should be decided by the commission members themselves. The court ruled the presidential designation unconstitutional, finding that the Constitution establishes commissions as independent bodies not under the control of the president. As independent bodies, the commissions have discretion to choose an acting chairman on their own according to their own rules and procedures.

Uploaded by

Jestherin Baliton
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

BRILLANTES V YORAC

G.R. No. 93867


December 18, 1990
FACTS:

The then President of the Philippines designated Associate Commissioner Haydee B. Yorac as Acting
Chairman of the Commission on Elections, in place of Chairman Hilario B. Davide, who had been named
chairman of the fact-finding commission to investigate the December 1989 coup d'etat attempt.
The petitioner then challenges this designation. He further contends that the choice of the Acting
Chairman of the Commission on Elections is an internal matter that should be resolved by the members
themselves and that the intrusion of the President of the Philippines violates their independence. He cites the
practice in this Court, where the senior Associate Justice serves as Acting Chief Justice in the absence of the
Chief Justice. No designation from the President of the Philippines is necessary.
The Solicitor General however answered that the designation made by the President of the
Philippines should therefore be sustained for reasons of "administrative expediency," to prevent disruption of
the functions of the COMELEC.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the designation of the president of Haydee b. Yoras as Acting Chairman of the
Commission on elections is constitutional?

RULING:
The designation by the President of the Philippines of respondent Haydee B. Yorac as Acting
Chairman of the Commissions on Elections is declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Article IX-A, Section 1, of the Constitution expressly describes all the Constitutional Commissions as
"independent." Although essentially executive in nature, they are not under the control of the President of the
Philippines in the discharge of their respective functions. Each of these Commissions conducts its own
proceedings under the applicable laws and its own rules and in the exercise of its own discretion. Its
decisions, orders and rulings are subject only to review on certiorari by this Court as provided by the
Constitution in Article IX-A, Section. As such the choice of a temporary chairman in the absence of the regular
chairman comes under that discretion. That discretion cannot be exercised for it, even with its consent, by
the President of the Philippines.
In the choice of the Acting Chairman, the members of the Commission on Elections would most likely
have been guided by the seniority rule as they themselves would have appreciated it. In any event, that
choice and the basis thereof were for them and not the President to make. It si followed that the acting
chairman cannot enjoy security of tenure even if the Constitution provides for many safeguards to the
independence of the Commission on Elections, foremost among which the security of tenure of its members.
That guaranty is not available to the respondent as Acting Chairman of the Commissions on Elections by
designation of the President of the Philippine, the designation being unconstitutional or in conflict with the
fundamental law.

You might also like