Anda di halaman 1dari 3

Calingin v.

CA (12 July 2004, Quisumbing)

Issue 1
WON the decision of the Ofce of the President (OP) was already fnal and
Peiioner! The decisions of the Ofce of the President on cases where it
has original jurisdiction become fnal and executory only after the lase of !"
days from the receit thereof and that the fling of a #otion for
$econsideration shall susend the running of the said eriod in accordance
with %ection !"& 'hater (& )oo* +,, of the -dministrati.e 'ode of !/012
%ection 31& 'hater 4 of the 5ocal 6o.ernment 'ode ($e2 -ct 1!37)&
which ro.ides that decisions of the Ofce of the President shall be
fnal and executory& alies only to decisions of the Ofce of the
President on administrati.e cases aealed from the sangguniang
panlalawigan& sangguniang panlungsod of highly8urbani9ed cities and
indeendent comonent cities& and sangguniang bayan of
municialities within the #etro #anila -rea2 ,t does not
decisions on cases where the Ofce of the President has original
jurisdiction such as those a Pro.incial 6o.ernor2
"es#ondens! No arguments in the case but ,:m sure they argued that it
was already fnal and executory
$eld! NO
,t is a rincile of statutory construction that where there are two
statutes that aly to a articular case& that which was secially
intended for the said case must re.ail2 The case on hand a
discilinary action against an electi.e local ofcial2 Thus& the 5ocal
6o.ernment 'ode is the alicable law and must re.ail the
-dministrati.e 'ode which is of general alication2
;urther& the 5ocal 6o.ernment 'ode of !//! was enacted much later
than the -dministrati.e 'ode of !/012 ,n statutory construction& all
laws or arts thereof which are inconsistent with the later law are
reealed or modifed accordingly2
<.en though aeal to the 'ourt of -eals is granted under %ec2
!& $ule 4( of the $e.ised $ules of 'ourt& %ec2 !=& $ule 4( of the
$e.ised $ules of 'ourt in relation to %ec2 30 of the 5ocal 6o.ernment
'ode ro.ides for the immediate execution ending aeal2
The decisions of the Ofce of the President under the 5ocal
6o.ernment 'ode are immediately executory e.en ending aeal
because the ertinent laws under which the decisions were rendered
mandated them to be so2 (Lapid v. CA)
,n sum& the decisions of the Ofce of the President are fnal and
executory2 No motion for reconsideration is allowed by law but the
arties may aeal the decision to the 'ourt of -eals2 The aeal& does not stay the execution of the decision2 Thus& the >,56
%ecretary may .alidly mo.e for its immediate execution2
Issue 2
WON the exemtion granted by the 'O#<5<' in its $esolution No2 (//= is
Peiioner! %he exemtion was in.alid for being based on a mere draft
resolution2 -ccording to him& a draft resolution does not oerate as a fnal
resolution of a case until the roer resolution is duly signed and
$eld! +-5,>
- erusal of the records re.eals that the $esolution in O2P2 'ase No2 778
!8/==7 was aro.ed and signed on #arch ==& =77! by <xecuti.e
%ecretary $enato de +illa by the authority of the President2 ?ence& the was before the romulgation of 'O#<5<' $esolution No2 (//=
on -ril =4& =77!2 The record also shows that the re@uest to
imlement the said susension order was fled on #arch ==& =77! by
the %enior >euty <xecuti.e %ecretary of the Ofce of the President
ursuant to the re@uirements stated in the $esolution2 'O#<5<' $esolution No2 ("=/ A which may be alied by
analogy and in relation to %ec2 = of 'O#<5<' $esolution No2 (47! A
merely re@uires the re@uest to be in writing indicating the ofce and
lace from which the ofcer is remo.ed& and the reason for said
mo.ement& and submitted together with the formal comlaint
executed under oath and containing the secifc charges and the
answer to said comlaint2 The re@uest for the exemtion was
accomanied with the of 'omlaint& of
'ontro.ersion& $ely and >raft $esolution2 The ertinent documents
re@uired by the 'O#<5<' to substantiate the re@uest were
submitted2 There being a roer basis for its grant of exemtion&
'O#<5<' $esolution No2 (//= is .alid2