FACTS:

The petitioner, the Governor of the Province of Batangas, appointed his brother, Benjamin Laurel, as Senior Executive Assistant in the Office of the Governor, a non-career service position. When the position of Provincial Administrator became vacant, the petitioner designated Benjamin as Acting Provincial Administrator until a regular Provincial Administrator is appointed. Benjamin was also given a promotional appointment as Civil Security Officer, a position classified as "primarily confidential" by the Civil Service Commission. A private citizen, Sangalang, filed a complaint with the Civil Service Commission alleging that Benjamin's appointment violated civil service rules and the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. The petitioner argued that Benjamin's designation as Acting Provincial Administrator did not violate the nepotism rule because it is a primarily confidential position, and there was no violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act as Benjamin was entitled to a monthly representation allowance on a reimbursement basis. The Civil Service Commission revoked Benjamin's designation as Acting Provincial Administrator, stating that the prohibition on nepotism also includes designation, and that Benjamin, being in non-career positions, could not be designated to a career position. The petitioner filed a motion to reconsider the Commission's ruling.

The petitioner, who held the position of Provincial Administrator, received a designation as such from the Provincial Governor of Nueva Ecija. However, the respondent Civil Service Commission issued a resolution stating that the position is not primarily confidential, as claimed by the petitioner. The petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied by the Commission. Thus, the petitioner filed the present petition seeking to nullify the Commission's resolutions. The petitioner argues that the Commission committed grave abuse of discretion and exceeded its jurisdiction in making the ruling. The Solicitor General, in the Commission's comment, supports the resolutions and contends that the position of Provincial Administrator belongs to the career service and is not primarily confidential. The Solicitor General also argues that the Commission has the authority to review designations and enforce civil service laws. The petitioner filed a reply, reiterating that the position is primarily confidential. The Solicitor General, in the rejoinder, states that the previous cases cited by the petitioner have been modified by certain provisions of PD Nos. 807 and 868.

ISSUES:

1. Whether the position of Provincial Administrator is primarily confidential and therefore exempt from the rule on nepotism.

2. Whether petitioner is estopped from claiming that the position of Provincial Administrator is primarily confidential.

3. Whether the nature of the position determines whether it falls under the classification of policy-determining, primarily confidential, or highly technical.

4. Whether the appointment of Benjamin Laurel as Acting Provincial Administrator violates the rule on nepotism.

5. Whether the designation of Benjamin Laurel is covered by the prohibition on nepotism.

6. Whether the designation of an individual to a position in the career service is considered an appointment.

7. Whether the designation of a relative within the prohibited degree to a vacant position in the career service violates the prohibition on nepotism.

8. Whether a private citizen can file a complaint against a government official or employee for violation of the law.

RULING:

1. The position of Provincial Administrator is not primarily confidential and is therefore subject to the rule on nepotism. The petitioner's prior admission that the position belongs to the career service and is not primarily confidential, along with the qualifications and functions specified in the Manual of Position Descriptions, support this conclusion.

2. Even if the petitioner is not estopped, his claim that the position of Provincial Administrator is primarily confidential is without merit.

3. Yes. The nature of the position ultimately determines whether it falls under the classification of policy-determining, primarily confidential, or highly technical. The initial determination made by the Executive regarding the classification is not conclusive and is subject to judicial review.

4. Yes. Benjamin Laurel's appointment as Acting Provincial Administrator violates the rule on nepotism because he is the brother of the appointing authority and they are related within the third degree of consanguinity. The prohibition on nepotism applies even to designations, as what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly.

5. No. The designation of Benjamin Laurel is covered by the prohibition on nepotism because designation is a form of appointment or assignment to a particular office.

6. The designation of an individual to a position in the career service is considered an appointment. Section 49 of P.D. No. 807 does not distinguish between designation and appointment, and reading it together with Section 25 of the same decree, career service positions may only be filled up by appointment, whether permanent or temporary. The designation accomplishes the same purpose as an appointment and therefore must be considered as such.

7. The designation of a relative within the prohibited degree to a vacant position in the career service violates the prohibition on nepotism. If a designation is not deemed an appointment under Section 49 of P.D. No. 807, the prohibition on nepotism would be meaningless and toothless. Any appointing authority could circumvent it by simply designating, and not appointing, a relative within the prohibited degree to a vacant position. Therefore, the designation of a relative violates the prohibition on nepotism.

8. A private citizen can file a complaint against a government official or employee for violation of the law. Section 37 of P.D. No. 807 allows a private citizen to directly file a complaint with the Civil Service Commission against a government official or employee. The Commission may then hear and decide the case or delegate the investigation to another department, agency, official, or group of officials. This provision gives teeth to the principle that a public office is a public trust and that public officers and employees must be accountable to the people. The vigilance of the citizenry is vital in a democracy.

PRINCIPLES:

• The nature of the position ultimately determines whether a position is primarily confidential, policy determining, or highly technical.

• The President is the only authority who can declare a position policy-determining, highly technical, or primarily confidential upon recommendation of the Civil Service Commission, Budget Commission, and the Presidential Reorganization Commission.

• Section 49 of P.D. No. 807 prohibits nepotism in the appointment or designation of relatives to career Civil Service positions.

• The nature of the position determines whether it falls under the classification of policy-determining, primarily confidential, or highly technical.

• Executive determinations on the classification of a position are not conclusive and are subject to judicial review.

• The prohibition on nepotism applies to both appointments and designations.

• Designation is considered an appointment or assignment to a particular office.

• Designation is considered an acting or temporary appointment that does not confer security of tenure.

• The designation of an individual to a vacant position in the career service is considered an appointment.

• The designation of a relative within the prohibited degree to a vacant position in the career service violates the prohibition on nepotism.

• A private citizen can file a complaint against a government official or employee for violation of the law.