Manolo vs Sistoza Case Digest

Here are some digested cases from the Jurisprudence regarding issues related to the Executive Department. I know, I digested it differently but this is how I remember things easily. You still have to read the whole Jurisprudence. You will never understand the things I wrote below, maybe some but perhaps most of the things I jot down are only the important ones and I might even forgot some important key factors, unless you have read the original text. Do not rely too much ion this. These digested cases will just help you remember things out during oral recitations. God bless future lawyers!

Manolo vs Sistoza

GR No. 107369

August 11, 1999

Petitioners question the legality of the permanent appointments issued by former President Aquino to senior officers of PNP who were promoted to the ranks of Chief Superintendent and Director without appointments submitted to the Commission on Appointments for confirmation.

Republic Act 6975 created the DILG and in Sec26 it states that Chief of PNP shall be appointed by President from among senior officers down to the rank of the chief superintendent are subject for confirmation.

Petitioner’s Arguments:

1.    Respondent officers acted without or in excess of their jurisdiction considering Republic Act 6975 and PNP akin to the AFP requires consent.

2.    Respondent secretary effected disbursement acted without or in excess of their jurisdiction.

Rules of Court:

1.    RA 6975 enjoys presumption of constitutionality however the court must see to it that every law passed by Congress is not repugnant to the organic law.

2.    Establishing of middle ground to avoid horse trading in Commission on Appointments (when almost all appointments needs consent)

3.    Mison Doctrine, only the first group requires consent

4.    Republic Act 6795 is unconstitutional

PNP is distinct from AFP, Sec 4 Article XVI of Constitution. Sec 6 Article XVI of the Constitution (police officers defn)