GROUP 10

1-JDC
Ma. Jelly Joyce Y. Anarna
Stephanie Bandales
Christian Lorenzana
Mogi Cloyd Mogello
Karla Regino
Legaspi vs. Civil Service Commission, 150 SCRA 530
G.R. No. L-72119 May 29, 1987
VALENTIN L. LEGASPI, petitioner,
vs.
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, respondent.
FACTS:
Valentin L. Legaspi invokes the fundamental right of the people to information on
matters of public concern through a special civil action for mandamus against the Civil
Service Commission (CSC). The CSC had earlier denied Legaspi's request for
information on the civil service eligibilities of, Julian Sibonghanoy and Mariano Agas,
employed as sanitarians in the Health Department of Cebu City. These government
employees had allegedly represented themselves as civil service eligibles who passed
the civil service examinations for sanitarians.
Claiming that his right to be informed of the eligibilities of Julian Sibonghanoy and
Mariano Agas, is guaranteed by the Constitution, and that he has no other plain, speedy
and adequate remedy to acquire the information, petitioner prays for the issuance of the
extraordinary writ of mandamus to compel the respondent Commission to disclose said
information.
ISSUE:
WON Legaspi is entitled to compel the Civil Service Commission to disclose
information regarding the eligibilities of Sibonghanoy and Agas., thus invoking his
constitutional right to full public disclosure.
HELD: YES.
The court held that when the question is one of public right and the object of the
mandamus is to procure the enforcement of a public duty, the people are regarded as
the real party in interest and the relator at whose instigation the proceedings are
instituted need not show that he has any legal or special interest in the result, it being
sufficient to show that he is a citizen and as such interested in the execution of the laws.
The Constitution provides the guarantee of adopting policy of full public disclosure
subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law as in regulation in the manner of
examining the public records by the government agency in custody thereof. But the

constitutional guarantee to information on matters of public concern is not absolute.

Under the Constitution, access to official records, papers, etc., are "subject to limitations
as may be provided by law" (Art. III, Sec. 7, second sentence). The law may therefore
exempt certain types of information from public scrutiny, such as those affecting national
security.
The court delves into determining whether the information sought for by the
petitioner is of public interest. All appointments in the Civil Service Commission are
made according to merit and fitness while a public office is a public trust. Public
employees therefore are accountable to the people even as to their eligibilities to their
positions in the government. The court also noted that the information on the result of
the CSC eligibility examination is released to the public therefore the request of
petitioner is one that is not unusual or unreasonable. The public, through any citizen,
has the right to verify the civil eligibilities of any person occupying government positions.
Thus the Civil Service Commission is ordered to open its register of eligibles for
the position of sanitarian, and to confirm or deny, the civil service eligibility of Julian
Sibonghanoy and Mariano Agas, for said position in the Health Department of Cebu
City, as requested by the petitioner Valentin L. Legaspi.

What is the theory of separation of powers?

The Theory of Separation of Powers holds that the three organs of government
must be separate and independent from one another. Any combination of these three
functions into a single or two organs is harmful and dangerous for individual liberty.
Separation of powers of the three organs is essential for the efficiency of the
government and the liberty of the people.
Government can work systematically and efficiently only when each of its organs
exercises its own powers and functions. Similarly, the liberty of the people can be
protected only when there is no concentration or combination of the three governmental
powers in the hands of one or two organs.
The theory of Separation of Powers holds that for keeping the government
limited, which is necessary for protecting the liberty of the people, the three functions of
government should be separated and performed by three separate organs.
What is the Doctrine of Separation of Powers?
In essence, separation of powers means the legislation belongs to Congress,
execution to the executive, settlement of legal controversies to the judiciary. Each is
therefore prevented from invading the domain of the others.
What are the powers separated?
>Executive Power
As head of the Executive Department, the President is the Chief Executive. He
represents the government as a whole and sees to it that all laws are enforced by the
officials and employees of his department. He has control over the executive
department, bureaus and offices. This means that he has the authority to assume
directly the functions of the executive department, bureau and office or interfere with the
discretion of its officials. Corollary to the power of control, the President also has the
duty of supervising the enforcement of laws for the maintenance of general peace and
public order. Thus, he is granted administrative power over bureaus and offices under
his control to enable him to discharge his duties effectively.
The President exercises general supervision over all local government units and
is also the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.
>Legislative Power
The legislative branch, which has the authority to make, alter or repeal laws
intended as a rule of conduct to govern the relation between individuals or between
individuals and the state is vested in the Congress. Congress is vested with the
tremendous power of the purse, traditionally recognized in the constitutional provision
that no money shall be paid out of the Treasury except in pursuance of an appropriation
made by law. It comprehends both the power to generate money by taxation (the power
to tax) and the power to spend it (the power to appropriate). The power to appropriate

carries with it the power to specify the amount that may be spent and the purpose for
which it may be spent.
>The Judicial Power
Judicial power is vested in the Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may
be established by law. The judiciary has the moderating power to determine the proper
allocation of powers between the branches of government. When the judiciary
mediates to allocate constitutional boundaries, it does not assert any superiority over
the other departments; it does not in reality nullify or invalidate an act of the legislature,
but only asserts the solemn and sacred obligation assigned to it by the Constitution to
determine conflicting claims of authority under the Constitution and to establish for the
parties in an actual controversy the rights which that instrument secures and guarantees
to them. In the words of Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno: The Judiciary may not have
the power of the sword, may not have the power of the purse, but it has the power to
interpret the Constitution, and the unerring lessons of history tell us that rightly wielded,
that power can make a difference for good.
While Congress has the power to define, prescribe and apportion
the jurisdiction of the various courts, Congress cannot deprive the Supreme Court of its
jurisdiction provided in the Constitution. No law shall also be passed reorganizing the
judiciary when it undermines the security of tenure of its members. The Supreme Court
also has administrative supervision over all courts and the personnel thereof, having the
power to discipline or dismiss judges of lower courts.
What is the purpose of separation of powers/
The separation of powers seeks to prevent the concentration of authority in one
person or group of persons that might lead to irreparable error or abuse in its exercise
to the detriment of republican institutions.
The principle of separation means that the governmental powers are divided
among the three departments of government: the legislative, executive and judicial, and
that each of these is separated from each other.
What is overlapping of functions or blending of powers?
There are instances under the Constitution when powers are not confined
exclusively within one department but are assigned to or shared by several
departments. It is often necessary for certain powers to be reposed in more than one
department, so they may better collaborate with, and in the process check, each other
for the public good.
Blending of powers is remarked as the Great ordinances of the Constitution do
not establish and divide fields of black and white. Even the more specific of them are
found to terminate in a penumbra shading gradually from one extreme to another. It
encompasses separation and independence on the one hand, as well as harmony and
cooperation on the other hand.
While the three departments are independent and separated, their powers
overlap. The doctrine of separation of powers seem to be that the whole power of one
department should not be exercised by the same hands which possess the whole power

of either of the other departments, and that no one department ought to possess directly
or indirectly an over ruling influence over the others.
What is the principle of checks and balances?
It allows one department to resist encroachments upon its prerogatives or to
rectify mistakes or excesses committed by the other departments.
Under the system of checks and balances, one department is given certain
powers by which it may definitely restrain the others from exceeding constitutional
authority. It may object or resist any encroachment upon its authority, or it may question,
if necessary any act or acts which unlawfully interferes with its sphere of jurisdiction and
authority.
The following are illustrations where there are checks and balances:
The lawmaking power of the Congress is checked by the President through its
veto power, which in turn maybe overturn by the legislature.
The Congress may refuse to give its concurrence to an amnesty proclaimed by
the President and the Senate to a treaty he has concluded.
The President may nullify a conviction in a criminal case by pardoning the
offender
The Congress may limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and that of inferior
courts and even abolish the latter tribunals.
The Judiciary in general has the power to declare invalid an act done by the
Congress, the President and his subordinates, or the Constitutional
Commissions.

Conference of Maritime Manning Agencies, petitioner,

vs.
POEA243 SCRA 666 [G.R. No. 114714] (April 21, 1995), respondent
The Conference of Maritime Manning Agencies, Inc. vs. Philippine Overseas
Employment Administration.
FACTS:
The Conference of Maritime Manning, Inc. (petitioner), an incorporated
association of licensed Filipino manning agencies, and its co-petitioners, all licensed
manning agencies who hire and recruit Filipino seamen for and in behalf of their
respective foreign ship-owner-principals, urge to annul the resolution issue by POEA.
(Resolution No. 01, series of 1994 and POEA Memorandum Circular No. 05)
The petitioners contended POEA does not have the power and authority to fix
and promulgate rates affecting death and workmens compensation of Filipino seamen
working in ocean-going vessels; only Congress can.
Governing Board Resolution No. 01: the POEA Governing Board resolves to
amend and increase the compensation and other benefits as specified under Part II,
Section C, paragraph 1 and Section L paragraphs 1 and 2 of the POEA Standard
Employment Contract for Seafarers.
ISSUE:
Whether or not POEA can promulgate rules by virtue of delegation of legislative
power.
HELD: YES.
Potestas delegata non delegari potest means what has been delegated cannot
be delegated. Reason of which is based upon the ethical principle that such delegated
power constitutes not only a right but a duty to be performed by the delegate through
the instrumentality of his own judgment and not through the intervening mind of another.
A further delegation of such power would constitute a negation of his duty in violation of
the trust reposed in the delegate mandated to discharge it directly.
Exceptions to above rule are the powers delegated to the people at large,
emergency powers of the President, tariff powers of the President, delegation to
Administrative bodies, and delegation to local government units.

The executive order creating the POEA was enacted to further implement the
social justice provisions of the 1973 Constitution. The constitutional challenge of the rule
making power of POEA based on impermissible delegation of legislative power had
been, as correctly contended by the public respondents, brushed aside by SC in
Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. vs. POEA.
The governing Board of Administration (POEA) shall promulgate the necessary
rules and regulations to govern the exercise of the adjudicatory functions of POEA. To
many of the problems attendant upon present-day undertakings, the legislature may not
have the competence to provide the required direct and efficacious, not to say, specific
solutions. These solutions may, however, be expected from its delegates, who are
supposed to be experts in the particular fields assigned to them.
While making laws is non-delegable that pertains exclusively to Congress,
nevertheless, the latter may constitutionally delegate the authority to promulgate rules
and regulations to implement a given legislation and effectuate its policies, for the
reason that the legislature finds it impracticable, if not impossible, to anticipate the
situations that may be met in carrying the law into effect. All that is required is that the
regulation should be not in contradiction to but in conformity with the standards
prescribed by law.