View full case

NATIONAL AMNESTY COMMISSION v. COA

FACTS:

The National Amnesty Commission (NAC) is a government agency tasked with receiving and reviewing amnesty applications. It consists of a Chairperson, three regular members appointed by the President, and ex officio members who designate representatives to attend NAC meetings. The NAC invoked Administrative Order No. 2, which entitles the ex officio members' representatives to per diems, allowances, bonuses, and other benefits. However, the payment of honoraria to these representatives was disallowed by the COA in accordance with COA Memorandum No. 97-038. The NAC filed a petition challenging the COA's ruling, alleging grave abuse of discretion.

The COA argued that there is no legal basis to grant honoraria to the NAC ex officio members' representatives. The COA cited the constitutional mandate of the Commission on Audit to ensure the proper use of government funds and properties. The COA maintains that it has exclusive auditing powers over all government entities.

The COA issued Memorandum No. 97-038, which implemented the Supreme Court decision in Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary. This decision declared unconstitutional Executive Order 284, which allowed cabinet members to hold other offices and receive compensation. The COA Memorandum directed auditors to disallow any payment of additional compensation or remuneration to cabinet secretaries, their deputies and assistants, or their representatives in violation of the rule on multiple positions. It required auditors to issue notices of disallowance and certificates of settlements and balances for unaudited accounts, review and re-open audited accounts, and submit reports on the status of disallowances. The petitioner argued that COA Memorandum No. 97-038 should have been published, but the court held that it is an internal and interpretative regulation that does not require publication.

The case involves the interpretation and enforcement of the constitutional prohibition on holding multiple offices and receiving double compensation by the COA. The COA memorandum, known as COA Memorandum No. 97-038, was issued to enforce this constitutional provision, which was previously explained by the Supreme Court in Civil Liberties Union v. The Executive Secretary. The Court held that allowing members of the Cabinet and their deputies and assistants to hold other government offices or positions and receive compensation is contrary to the Constitution.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether COA Memorandum No. 97-038, which implements the constitutional prohibition on holding multiple offices and receiving double compensation, needs to be published to be effective and valid.

  2. Whether or not the ex-officio members' representatives are entitled to receive additional compensation for their services.

  3. Whether or not the ex-officio members' representatives are covered by the constitutional prohibition against holding multiple positions in the government and receiving double compensation.

  4. Whether the representatives of ex officio members of the National Amnesty Commission (NAC) are entitled to receive per diems, allowances, and other benefits.

  5. Whether the reopening of the NAC accounts within three years after its settlement is within the jurisdiction of the Commission on Audit (COA).

RULING:

  1. COA Memorandum No. 97-038 is merely an internal and interpretative regulation or letter of instruction which does not need publication to be effective and valid. It is not an implementing rule or regulation of a statute but a directive issued by the COA to its auditors to enforce the self-executing prohibition imposed by Section 13, Article VII of the Constitution on the President and his official family, their deputies and assistants, or their representatives from holding multiple offices and receiving double compensation.

  2. The ex-officio members' representatives are not entitled to receive additional compensation for their services. The reason is that these services are already paid for and covered by the compensation attached to their principal office.

  3. The ex-officio members' representatives are covered by the constitutional prohibition against holding multiple positions in the government and receiving double compensation.

  4. The representatives of ex officio members of the NAC are not entitled to receive per diems, allowances, and other benefits. The Court declared Section 1, Rule II of Administrative Order No. 2 s. 1999 null and void for being promulgated in excess of the rule-making authority of the NAC. The Constitution and laws prohibit ex officio members from receiving additional compensation, therefore, their representatives are likewise restricted from receiving such benefits. The administrative order only allows the representatives to attend NAC meetings as guests or witnesses, not to decide for the ex officio members or receive compensations.

  5. The COA has jurisdiction to review and revise settled accounts within three years after their settlement, as provided by Section 52 of Presidential Decree No. 1445. The reopening of the NAC accounts is within COA's jurisdiction.

PRINCIPLES:

  • The constitutional prohibition on holding dual or multiple offices or employment applies to the President, Vice-President, members of the Cabinet, their deputies and assistants. (Civil Liberties Union vs. The Executive Secretary)

  • Section 13, Article VII of the Constitution is the exception to the general rule stated in Section 7, Article IX-B. (Civil Liberties Union vs. The Executive Secretary)

  • The prohibition under Section 13, Article VII does not cover positions held without additional compensation in ex-officio capacities as provided by law and as required by the primary functions of the concerned official's office. (Civil Liberties Union vs. The Executive Secretary)

  • The ex-officio position being part of the principal office, the official concerned has no right to receive additional compensation for his services in the said position.

  • Ex-officio posts held without additional compensation do not fall under the definition of "any other office" within the contemplation of the constitutional prohibition.

  • Supreme Court decisions assume the same authority as valid statutes. The Court's interpretation of the law is part of that law as of the date of enactment because its interpretation merely establishes the contemporary legislative intent that the construed law purports to carry into effect.

  • COA Memorandum No. 97-038 does not need to be published to be valid, effective, and enforceable, except for those provided for under the Constitution.

  • There are two constitutional prohibitions against holding multiple positions in the government and receiving double compensation: (1) the blanket prohibition on all government employees, and (2) the stricter prohibition on the President and his official family.

  • Ex-officio members' representatives are not exempt from the general prohibition because there is no law or administrative order creating a new office or position and authorizing additional compensation.

  • The Administrative Code of 1987 reiterates the constitutional prohibition against multiple positions in the government and receiving additional or double compensation.

  • Designation does not entitle an officer to receive the salary of the position. The legal basis of an employee's right to claim the salary attached is a duly issued and approved appointment to the position, and not a mere designation.

  • Cabinet secretaries and their deputies or assistants holding ex-officio positions are proscribed from receiving additional compensation because their services are already paid for and covered by the compensation attached to their principal office.

  • The laws, rules, prohibitions, or restrictions that cover the ex-officio member apply to their representatives.

  • The Government is never estopped by the mistake or error on the part of its agents.

  • Erroneous application and enforcement of the law by public officers do not preclude subsequent corrective application of the statute.

  • The payment of allowances to representatives must be authorized by the law.

  • A de facto officer is one who is in possession of an office and is discharging its duties under color of authority derived from an appointment, however irregular or informal, so that the incumbent is not a mere volunteer.

  • Representatives cannot be considered de facto officers if they were merely designated and not appointed.

  • Representatives are not entitled to something their own principals are prohibited from receiving.