G.R. No.

133132
lawphil.net /judjuris/juri2000/jan2000/gr_133132_2000.html

EN BANC

G.R. No. 133132 January 25, 2000

ALEXIS C. CANONIZADO, EDGAR DULA TORRES, and ROGELIO A. PUREZA, petitioners,

vs.
HON. ALEXANDER P. AGUIRRE, as Executive Secretary, HON. EMILIA T. BONCODIN, as
Secretary of Budget and Management, JOSE PERCIVAL L. ADIONG, ROMEO L. CAIRME and
VIRGINIA U. CRISTOBAL, respondents.

GONZAGA-REYES, J.:

The central issue posed before this Court in the present case is the constitutionality of Republic Act
No. 8851 (RA 8551), otherwise known as the "Philippine National Police Reform and
Reorganization Act of 1998,"1 by virtue of which petitioners herein, who were all members of the
National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM), were separated from office. Petitioners claim that such
law violates their constitutionally guaranteed right to security of tenure.

The NAPOLCOM was originally created under Republic Act No. 6975 (RA 6975), entitled "An Act
Establishing The Philippine National Police Under A Reorganized Department Of The Interior And
Local Government, And For Other Purposes." Under RA 6975, the members of the NAPOLCOM
were petitioners Edgar Dula Torres, Alexis C. Canonizado, Rogelio A. Pureza and respondent Jose
Percival L. Adiong. Dula Torres was first appointed to the NAPOLCOM on January 8, 1991 for a six
year term. He was re-appointed on January 23, 1997 for another six years. Canonizado was
appointed on January 25, 1993 to serve the unexpired term of another Commissioner which ended
on December 31, 1995. On August 23, 1995, Canonizado was re-appointed for another six years.
Pureza was appointed on January 2, 1997 for a similar term of six years. Respondent Adiong's
appointment to the NAPOLCOM was issued on July 23, 1996. None of their terms had expired at
the time the amendatory law was passed.2

On March 6, 1998, RA 8551 took effect; it declared that the terms of the current Commissioners
were deemed as expired upon its effectivity. Pursuant thereto, President Ramos appointed Romeo
L. Cairme on March 11, 1998 as a member of the NAPOLCOM for a full six year term. On the
same date, Adiong, was given a term extension of two years since he had served less than two
years of his previous term. Cairme and Adiong both took their oaths of office on April 6, 1998.3
Completing the membership of the NAPOLCOM are Leo S. Magahum and Cleofe M. Factoran,
who were appointed by President Estrada on June 30, 1998 and who took their oaths of office on
July 2, 1998.4

According to petitioners, sections 4 and 8 of RA 8551 are unconstitutional. Section 4, amending

section 13 of Republic Act No. 6975, provides

Sec. 13. Creation and Composition. A National Police Commission, hereinafter referred to
as the Commission, is hereby created for the purpose of effectively discharging the functions
prescribed in the Constitution and provided in this Act. The Commission shall be an agency
attached to the Department for policy and program coordination. It shall be composed of a
Chairperson, four (4) regular Commissioners, and the Chief of the PNP as ex-officio
member. Three (3) of the regular Commissioners shall come from the civilian sector who are
neither active nor former members of the police or military, one (1) of whom shall be
1/10
 designated as vice chairperson by the President. The fourth regular Commissioner shall
come from the law enforcement sector either active or retired: Provided, That an active
member of a law enforcement agency shall be considered resigned from said agency once
appointed to the Commission: Provided further, That at least one (1) of the Commissioners
shall be a woman. The Secretary of the Department shall be the ex-officio Chairperson of
the Commission, while the Vice Chairperson shall act as the executive officer of the
Commission.

Meanwhile, section 8 states that

Upon the effectivity of this Act, the terms of office of the current Commissioners are deemed
expired which shall constitute a bar to their reappointment or an extension of their terms in
the Commission except for current Commissioners who have served less than two (2) years
of their terms of office who may be appointed by the President for a maximum term of two
(2) years.

Petitioners argue that their removal from office by virtue of section 8 of RA 8551 violates their
security of tenure.1wphi1.nt

It is beyond dispute that petitioners herein are members of the civil service, which embraces all
branches, subdivisions, instrumentalities, and agencies of the Government, including government-
owned or controlled corporations with original charters.5 As such, they cannot be removed or
suspended from office, except for cause provided by law.6 The phrase "except for cause provided
by law" refers to ". . . reasons which the law and sound public policy recognize as sufficient
warrant for removal, that is, legal cause, and not merely causes which the appointing power in the
exercise of discretion may deem sufficient."7

Public respondents insist that the express declaration in section 8 of RA 8551 that the terms of
petitioners' offices are deemed expired discloses the legislative intent to impliedly abolish the
NAPOLCOM created under RA 6975 pursuant to a bona fide reorganization. In support of their
theory, public respondents cite the various changes introduced by RA 8551 in the functions,
composition and character of the NAPOLCOM as proof of Congress' intention to abolish the body
created under RA 6975 in order to replace it with a new NAPOLCOM which is more civilian in
nature, in compliance with the constitutional mandate. Petitioners' posit the theory that the abolition
of petitioners' offices was a result of a reorganization of the NAPOLCOM allegedly effected by RA
8551.8

The creation and abolition of public offices is primarily a legislative function.9 It is acknowledged
that Congress may abolish any office it creates without impairing the officer's right to continue in
the position held10 and that such power may be exercised for various reasons, such as the lack of
funds11 or in the interest of economy.12 However, in order for the abolition to be valid, it must be
made in good faith, not for political or personal reasons, or in order to circumvent the constitutional
security of tenure of civil service employees.13

An abolition of office connotes an intention to do away with such office wholly and permanently, as
the word "abolished" denotes.14 Where one office is abolished and replaced with another office
vested with similar functions, the abolition is a legal nullity. Thus, in U.P. Board of Regents v.
Rasul15 we said:

It is true that a valid and bona fide abolition of an office denies to the incumbent the right to
security of tenure. [De la Lanna v. Alba, 112 SCRA 294 (1982)]. However, in this case, the
renaming and restructuring of the PGH and its component units cannot give rise to a valid
and bona fide abolition of the position of PGH Director. This is because where the abolished
office and the offices created in its place have similar functions, the abolition lacks good
faith. [Jose L. Guerrero v. Hon. Antonio Arizabal, G.R. No. 81928, June 4, 1990, 186 SCRA
108 (1990)]. We hereby apply the principle enunciated in Cesar Z. Dario vs. Hon. Salvador
M. Mison [176 SCRA 84 (1989)] that abolition which merely changes the nomenclature of
positions is invalid and does not result in the removal of the incumbent.

The above notwithstanding, and assuming that the abolition of the position of the PGH

2/10
 Director and the creation of a UP-PGH Medical Center Director are valid, the removal of the
incumbent is still not justified for the reason that the duties and functions of the two positions
are basically the same. . . . (emphasis supplied)

This was also our ruling in Guerrero v. Arizabal ,1 6 wherein we declared that the substantial
identity in the functions between the two offices was indicia of bad faith in the removal of petitioner
pursuant to a reorganization.

We come now to the case at bench. The question that must first be resolved is whether or not
petitioners were removed by virtue of a valid abolition of their office by Congress. More specifically,
whether the changes effected by RA 8551 in reference to the NAPOLCOM were so substantial as
to effectively create a completely new office in contemplation of the law. In answer to this query,
the case of Mayor v. Macaraig17 is squarely in point.

In that case, the petitioners assailed the constitutionality of Republic Act No. 6715 18 insofar as it
declared vacant the positions of the Commissioners, Executive Labor Arbiters and Labor Arbiters of
the National Labor Relations Commission and provided for the removal of the incumbents upon the
appointment and qualification of their successors.19 The Court held that the removal of petitioners
was unconstitutional since Republic Act No. 6715 did not expressly or impliedly abolish the offices
of petitioners, there being no irreconcilable inconsistency in the nature, duties and functions of the
petitioners' offices under the old law and the new law. Thus:

Abolition of an office is obviously not the same as the declaration' that that office is vacant.
While it is undoubtedly a prerogative of the legislature to abolish certain offices, it can not be
conceded the power to simply pronounce those offices vacant and thereby effectively
remove the occupants or holders thereof from the civil service. Such an act would constitute,
on its face, an infringement of the constitutional guarantee of security of tenure, and will have
to be struck down on that account. It can not be justified by the professed "need to
professionalize the higher levels of officialdom invested with adjudicatory powers and
functions, and to upgrade their qualifications, ranks, and salaries or emoluments.

This is precisely what RA 8851 seeks to do declare the offices of petitioners vacant, by declaring
that "the terms of office of the current Commissioners are deemed expired," thereby removing
petitioners herein from the civil service. Congress may only be conceded this power if it is done
pursuant to a bona fide abolition of the NAPOLCOM.

RA 8551 did not expressly abolish petitioners' positions. In order to determine whether there has
been an implied abolition, it becomes necessary to examine the changes introduced by the new
law in the nature, composition and functions of the NAPOLCOM.

Under RA 6975, the NAPOLCOM was described as a collegial body within the Department of the
Interior and Local Government,2 0 (Department) whereas under RA 8551 it is made "an agency
attached to the Department for policy and program coordination."2 1 Contrary to what public
respondents would have us believe, this does not result in the creation of an entirely new office. In
Mayor, the NLRC, prior to the passage of the amendatory law, was also considered an integral part
of the Department of Labor and Employment. RA 6715, however, changed that by declaring that it
shall instead ". .be attached to the Department of Labor and Employment for program coordination
only. . . ." making it a more autonomous body. The Court held that this change in the NLRC's
nature was not sufficient to justify a conclusion that the new law abolished the offices of the labor
commissioners.

Another amendment pointed out by public respondents is the revision of the NAPOLCOM's
composition. RA 8551 expanded the membership of the NAPOLCOM from four to five
Commissioners by adding the Chief of the PNP as an ex-officio member. In addition, the new law
provided that three of the regular Commissioners shall come from the civilian sector who are
neither active nor former members of the police or military, and that the fourth regular
Commissioner shall come from the law enforcement sector either active or retired. Furthermore, it
is required that at least one of the Commissioners shall be a woman."2 2 Again, as we held in
Mayor, such revisions do not constitute such essential changes in the nature of the NAPOLCOM
as to result in an implied abolition of such office. It will be noted that the organizational structure of
3/10
the NAPOLCOM, as provided in section 20 of RA 6975 as amended by section 10 of RA 8551,23
remains essentially the same and that, except for the addition of the PNP Chief as ex-officio
member, the composition of the NAPOLCOM is also substantially identical under the two laws.
Also, under both laws, the Secretary of the Department shall act as the ex-officio Chairman of the
Commission and the Vice-Chairman shall be one of the Commissioners designated by the
President.24

Finally, the powers and duties of the NAPOLCOM remain basically unchanged by the
amendments. Under RA 6975, the Commission has the following powers and functions:

(a) Exercise administrative control over the Philippine National Police;

(b) Advise the President on all matters involving police functions and administration;

(c) Foster and develop policies and promulgate rules and regulations, standards and
procedures to improve police services based on sound professional concepts and principles;

(d) Examine and audit, and thereafter establish the standards for such purposes on a
continuing basis, the performance, activities, and facilities of all police agencies throughout
the country;

(e) Prepare a police manual prescribing rules and regulations for efficient organization,
administration, and operation, including recruitment, selection, promotion and retirement;

(f) Establish a system of uniform crime reporting;

(g) Conduct surveys and compile statistical data for the proper evaluation of the efficiency
and effectiveness of all police units in the country;

(h) Render to the President and to Congress an annual report on its activities and
accomplishments during the (30) days after the end of the calendar year, which shall include
an appraisal of the conditions obtaining in the organization and administration of police
agencies in the municipalities, cities and provinces throughout the country, and
recommendation for appropriate remedial legislation;

(i) Approve or modify, through the National Appellate Board, personnel disciplinary actions
involving demolition or dismissal from the service imposed upon members of the Philippine
National Police by the Chief of the Philippine National Police;

(j) Affirm reverse or modify, through the National Appellate Board, personnel disciplinary
actions involving demotion or dismissal from the service imposed upon members of the
Philippine National Police by the Chief of the Philippine National Police;

(k) Exercise appellate jurisdiction through the regional appellate boards over administrative
cases against policemen and over decisions on claims for police benefits;

(l) Recommend to the President, through the Secretary, within sixty (60) days before the
commencement of each calendar year, a crime prevention;

(m) Prescribe minimum standards for arms, equipment, and uniforms and, after consultation
with the Philippine Heraldry Commission, for insignia of ranks, awards and medals of honor;

(n) Issue subpoena and subpoena duces tecum in matters pertaining to the discharge of its
own powers and duties, and designate who among its personnel can issue such processes
and administer oaths in connection therewith; and

(o) Perform such other functions necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act and as the
President may direct.

Meanwhile, the NAPOLCOM's functions under section 5 of RA 8551 are:

a) Exercise administrative control and operational supervision over the Philippine National
4/10
Police which shall mean the power to:

1) Develop policies and promulgate a police manual prescribing rules and regulations
for efficient organization, administration, and operation, including criteria for
manpower allocation, distribution and deployment, recruitment, selection , promotion,
and retirement of personnel and the conduct of qualifying entrance and promotional
examinations for uniformed members;

2) Examine and audit, and thereafter establish the standards for such purposes on a
continuing basis, the performance, activities and facilities of all police agencies
throughout the country;

3) Establish a system of uniform crime reporting;

4) Conduct an annual self-report survey and compile statistical date for the accurate
assessment of the crime situation and the proper evaluation of the efficiency and
effectiveness of all police units in the country;

5) Approve or modify plans and programs on education and training, logistical

requirements, communications, records, information systems, crime laboratory, crime
prevention and crime reporting;

6) Affirm, reverse or modify, through the National Appellate Board, personnel

disciplinary actions involving demotion or dismissal from the service imposed upon
members of the Philippine National Police by the Chief of the Philippine National
Police;

7) Exercise appellate jurisdiction through the regional appellate boards over

administrative cases against policemen and over decisions on claims for police
benefits;

8) Prescribe minimum standards for arms, equipment, and uniforms and after
consultation with the Philippine Heraldry Commission, for insignia of ranks, awards,
and medals of honor. Within ninety (90) days from the effectivity of this Act, the
standards of the uniformed personnel of the PNP must be revised which should be
clearly distinct from the military and reflective of the civilian character of the police;

9) Issue subpoena and subpoena duces tecum in matters pertaining to the discharge
of its own powers and duties, and designate who among its personnel can issue such
processes and administer oaths in connection therewith;

10) Inspect and assess the compliance of the PNP on the established criteria for
manpower allocation, distribution, and deployment and their impact on the community
and the crime situation, and therewith formulate appropriate guidelines for
maximization of resources and effective utilization of the PNP personnel;

11) Monitor the performance of the local chief executives as deputies of the
Commission; and

12) Monitor and investigate police anomalies and irregularities.

b) Advise the President on all matters involving police functions and administration;

c) Render to the President and to the Congress an annual report on its activities and
accomplishments during the thirty (30) days after the end of the calendar year, which shall
include an appraisal of the conditions obtaining in the organization and administration of
police agencies in the municipalities, cities and provinces throughout the country, and
recommendations for appropriate remedial legislation;

d) Recommend to the President, through the Secretary, within sixty (60) days before the
commencement of each calendar year, a crime prevention program; and
5/10
 e) Perform such other functions necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act and as the
President may direct.

Clearly, the NAPOLCOM continues to exercise substantially the same administrative, supervisory,
rule-making, advisory and adjudicatory functions.

Public respondents argue that the fact that the NAPOLCOM is now vested with administrative
control and operational supervision over the PNP, whereas under RA 6975 it only exercised
administrative control should be construed as evidence of legislative intent to abolish such office.25
This contention is bereft of merit. Control means "the power of an officer to alter or modify or set
aside what a subordinate officer had done in the performance of his duties and to substitute the
judgment of the former for the that of the latter."26 On the other hand, to supervise is to oversee, to
have oversight of, to superintend the execution of or the performance of a thing, or the movements
or work of a person, to inspect with authority; it is the power or authority of an officer to see that
subordinate officers perform their duties.27 Thus, the power of control necessarily encompasses
the power of supervision and adding the phrase "operational supervision" under the powers of the
NAPOLCOM would not bring about a substantial change in its functions so as to arrive at the
conclusion that a completely new office has been created.

Public respondents would have this Court believe that RA 8551 reorganized the NAPOLCOM
resulting in the abolition of petitioners' offices. We hold that there has been absolutely no attempt
by Congress to effect such a reorganization.

Reorganization takes place when there is an alteration of the existing structure of government
offices or units therein, including the lines of control, authority and responsibility between them.28
It involves a reduction of personnel, consolidation of offices, or abolition thereof by reason of
economy or redundancy of functions.29 Naturally, it may result in the loss of one's position through
removal or abolition of an office. However, for a reorganization to be valid, it must also pass the test
of good faith, laid down in Dario v. Mison:30

. . . As a general rule, a reorganization is carried out in "good faith" if it is for the purpose of
economy or to make bureaucracy more efficient. In that event, no dismissal (in case of a
dismissal) or separation actually occurs because the position itself ceases to exist. And in
that case, security of tenure would not be a Chinese wall. Be that as it may, if the "abolition,"
which is nothing else but a separation or removal, is done for political reasons or purposely
to defeat security of tenure, or otherwise not in good faith, no valid "abolition" takes place
and whatever "abolition" is done, is void ab initio. There is an invalid "abolition" as where
there is merely a change of nomenclature of positions, or where claims of economy are
belied by the existence of ample funds.

It is exceedingly apparent to this Court that RA 8551 effected a reorganization of the PNP, not of
the NAPOLCOM. They are two separate and distinct bodies, with one having supervision and
control over the other. In fact, it is the NAPOLCOM that is given the duty of submitting a proposed
reorganization plan of the PNP to Congress.3 1 As mentioned earlier, the basic structure of the
NAPOLCOM has been preserved by the amendatory law. There has been no revision in its lines of
control, authority and responsibility, neither has there been a reduction in its membership, nor a
consolidation or abolition of the offices constituting the same. Adding the Chief of the PNP as an
ex-officio member of the Commission does not result in a reorganization.

No bona fide reorganization of the NAPOLCOM having been mandated by Congress, RA 8551,
insofar as it declares the terms of office of the incumbent Commissioners, petitioners herein, as
expired and resulting in their removal from office, removes civil service employees from office
without legal cause and must therefore be struck down for being constitutionally infirm.

Petitioners are thus entitled to be reinstated to office. It is of no moment that there are now new
appointees to the NAPOLCOM. It is a well-entrenched principle that when a regular government
employee is illegally dismissed, his position never became vacant under the law and he is
considered as not having left his office. The new appointments made in order to replace petitioners
are not valid.32

6/10
At this juncture, we note that it is alleged by public respondents that on June 30, 1998, Canonizado
accepted an appointment by President Estrada as the Inspector General of Internal Affairs
Services (IAS) of the PNP, pursuant to sections 40 and 41 of RA 8551 and that he took his oath of
office before the President on July 7, 1998. However, this is a mere allegation on the part of public
respondents of which this Court cannot take judicial notice. Furthermore, this issue has not been
fully ventilated in the pleadings of the parties. Therefore, such allegation cannot be taken into
consideration by this Court in passing upon the issues in the present case.

Petitioners also assail the constitutionality of section 4 of RA 8551 insofar as it limits the law
enforcement sector to only one position on the Commission and categorizes the police as being
part of the law enforcement sector despite section 6 of Article XVI of the Constitution which
provides that the police force shall be civilian in character. Moreover, it is asserted by petitioners
that the requirement in section 4 that one of the Commissioners shall be a woman has no rational
basis and is therefore discriminatory. They claim that it amounts to class legislation and amounts to
an undue restriction upon the appointing power of the President as provided under section 16 of
Article VII of the Constitution.33

In view of our ruling upon the unconstitutionality of petitioners' removal from office by virtue of
section 8 of RA 8551, we find that there is no longer any need to pass upon these remaining
constitutional questions. It is beyond doubt that the legislature has the power to provide for the
composition of the NAPOLCOM since it created such body. Besides, these questions go into the
very wisdom of the law, and unquestionably lie beyond the normal prerogatives of the Court to pass
upon.34

WHEREFORE, we grant the petition, but only to the extent of declaring section 8 of RA 8551
unconstitutional for being in violation of the petitioners' right to security of tenure. The removal from
office of petitioners as a result of the application of such unconstitutional provision of law and the
appointment of new Commissioners in their stead is therefore null and void. Petitioners herein are
entitled to REINSTATEMENT and to the payment of full backwages to be reckoned from the date
they were removed from office.35

SO ORDERED.

Davide, Jr., C.J., Bellosillo, Melo, Puno, Vitug, Kapunan, Mendoza, Panganiban, Quisumbing,
Purisima, Pardo, Buena, Ynares-Santiago and De Leon, Jr., JJ., concur.

Footnotes

1 Entitled "An Act Providing For the Reform And Reorganization Of The Philippine National
Police And For Other Purposes, Amending Certain Provisions Of Republic Act Numbered
Sixty-Nine Hundred And Seventy-Five Entitled, "An Act Establishing The Philippine National
Police Under A Re-Organized Department Of The Interior And Local Government, And For
Other Purposes." Took effect on March 6, 1998.

2 Rollo, 81.

3 Ibid.

4 Ibid., 83.

5 Constitution, art. 9 (B), sec. 2 (1).

6 Id., art. 9 (B), sec. 2 (3).

7 De los Santos vs. Mallare, 87 Phil 289 (1950).

8 Rollo, 84-94.

9 Eugenio v. Civil Service Commission, 243 SCRA 196 (1995).

7/10
10 Manalang v. Quitoriano, 94 Phil 903 (1954).

11 Ginzon v. Municipality of Murcia, 158 SCRA 1 (1988); Gregorio v. Court of Appeals, 129
SCRA 184 (1984).

12 Abrot v. Court of Appeals, 116 SCRA 468 (1982).

13 Baldoz v. Office of the President, 78 SCRA 354 (1977).

14 Busacay v. Buenaventura and Murao, 93 Phil 786 (1953).

15 200 SCRA 685 (1991). See Gacho v. Osmena, Jr., 103 Phil 837 (1958); Brillo v. Enage,
94 Phil 732 (1954).

16 186 SCRA 108 (1990).

17 194 SCRA 672 (1991).

18 Entitled "An Act To Extend Protection To Labor, Strengthen The Constitutional Rights Of
Workers To Self-Organization, Collective Bargaining And Peaceful Concerted Activities,
Foster Industrial Peace And Harmony, Promote The Preferential Use Of Voluntary Modes Of
Settling Labor Disputes And Reorgnize The National Labor Relations Commission,
Amending Presidential Decree No. 441, As Amended, Otherwise Known As The Labor Code
Of The Philippines, Appropriating Funds Therefor And For Other Purposes." Took effect on
March 21, 1989.

19 Id. SEC. 35 provides

Equity of the Incumbent. Incumbent career officials and rank-and-file employees of

the National Labor Relations Commission not otherwise affected by the Act shall
continue to hold office without need of reappointment. However, consistent with the
need to professionalize the higher levels of officialdom invested with adjudicatory
powers and functions, and to upgrade their qualifications, ranks, and salaries or
emoluments, all positions of the Commissioners, Executive Labor Arbiters and Labor
Arbiters of the present National Labor Relations Commission are hereby declared
vacant. However, subject officials shall continue to temporarily discharge their duties
and functions until their successors shall have been duly appointed and qualified.
(emphasis supplied).

20 RA 6975, sec. 13.

21 RA 8551, sec. 4.

22 Id.

23 Id., SEC. 10 Section 20 of Republic Act No. 6975 is hereby amended to read as follows:

Sec. 20. Organizational Structure. The Commission shall consist of the following
units:

(a) Commission Proper. This is composed of the offices of the Chairman and
four (4) Commissioners.

(b) Staff Services. The staff services of the Commission shall be as follows:

(1) The Planning and Research Service, which shall provide technical
services to the Commission in areas of overall policy formulation,
strategic and operational planning, management systems or procedures,
evaluation and monitoring of the Commission's programs, projects and
internal operations; and shall conduct thorough research and analysis on
social and economic conditions affecting peace and order in the country;

8/10
 (2) The Legal Affairs Service, which shall provide the Commission with
efficient service as legal counsel of the Commission; draft or study
contracts affecting the Commission and submit appropriate
recommendations pertaining thereto; and render legal opinions arising
from the administration and operation of the Philippine National Police
and the Commission;

(3) The Crime Prevention and Coordination Service, which shall

undertake criminological researches and studies; formulate a national
crime prevention plan; develop a crime prevention and information
program and provide editorial direction for all criminology research and
crime prevention publications;

(4) The Personnel and Administrative Service, which shall perform

personnel functions for the Commission, administer the entrance and
promotional examinations for the policemen, provide the necessary
services relating to records, correspondence, supplies, property and
equipment, security and general services, and the maintenance and
utilization of facilities, and provide services relating to manpower, career
planning and development, personnel transaction and employee welfare;

(5) The Inspection, Monitoring and Investigation Service, which shall

conduct continuous inspection and management audit of personnel,
facilities and operations at all levels of command of the PNP, monitor the
implementation of the Commission's programs and projects relative to
the law enforcement; and monitor and investigate police anomalies and
irregularities;

(6) The Installations and Logistics Service, which shall review the
Commission's plans and programs and formulate policies and
procedures regarding acquisition, inventory, control, distribution,
maintenance and disposal of supplies and shall oversee the
implementation of programs on transportation facilities and installations
and the procurement and maintenance of supplies and equipment; and

(7) The Financial Service, which shall provide the Commission with staff
advice and assistance on budgetary and financial matters, including the
overseeing of the processing and disbursement of funds pertaining to the
scholarship program and surviving children of deceased and/or
permanently incapacitated PNP personnel.

(c) Disciplinary Appellate Boards. The Commission shall establish a formal

administrative disciplinary appellate machinery consisting of the National
Appellate Board and the regional appellate boards.1wphi1.nt

The National Appellate Board shall decide cases on appeal from decisions rendered
by the chief, while the regional appellate boards shall decide cases on appeal from
decisions rendered by officers other than the PNP chief, the mayor, and the People's
Law Enforcement Board (PLEB) created hereunder.

(amendments are underscored)

24 RA 6975, sec. 13; RA 8551, sec. 4.

25 Rollo, 88.

26 Blaquera v. Alcala, 295 SCRA 366 (1998).

27 Borres v. Canonoy, G.R. No. L-31641, October 23, 1981.

28 De Leon and De Leon, Jr., The Law On Public Officers And Election Law (1994 ed.), 365.
9/10
 29 Dario v. Mison, 176 SCRA 84 (1989).

30 176 SCRA 84 (1989). See Dytiapco v. Civil Service Commission, 211 SCRA 88 (1992);
Domingo v. Development Bank of the Philippines, 207 SCRA 766 (1992); Pari-an v. Civil
Service Commission, 202 SCRA 772 (1991).

31 RA 8551, SEC. 13. Authority of the Commission to Reorganize the PNP.

Notwithstanding the provisions of Republic Act No. 6975 on the organizational

structure and rank classification of the PNP, the Commission shall conduct a
management audit, and prepare and submit to Congress a proposed reorganization
plan of the PNP not later than December 31, 1998, subject to the limitations provided
under this Act and based on the following criteria: a) increased police visibility through
dispersal of personnel from the headquarters to the field offices and by the
appointment and assignment of non-uniformed personnel to positions which are
purely administrative, technical, clerical or menial in nature and other positions which
are not actually and directly related to police operation; and b) efficient and optimized
delivery of police services to the communities.

The PNP reorganization program shall be approved by Congress through a joint

resolution.

32 Floreza v. Ongpin, 182 SCRA 692 (1990); Tanala v. Legaspi, 13 SCRA 566 (1965).

33 Rollo, 8-12.

34 Osmena v. Commission on Elections, 288 SCRA 447 (1998).

35 Mendoza v. Quisumbing, 186 SCRA 108 (1990).

The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation

10/10