Alunan III vs. Asuncion

CIS agents, including NAPOLCOM operatives, who opted to be absorbed as non-uniformed personnel of the PNP are civilian personnel covered by civil service laws and are not empowered to exercise police powers reserved to uniformed PNP personnel, because R.A. No. 6975 revised the whole police system and repealed R.A. No. 5750.

Petitioners are the Chairman and four Commissioners of the National Police Commission together with PNP Chief Superintendents, charged with administration and control of the Philippine National Police. Private respondents are agents and regular employees of the Criminal Investigation Service suing through the CIS Agents and the Regular Employees Association, Inc. The controlling statutes are R.A. No. 6975 creating the Philippine National Police pursuant to the constitutional mandate for one police force, and R.A. No. 5750 governing qualifications, selection, appointment and peace-officer powers of CIS civilian investigation agents.

Petitioners Rafael M. Alunan III as NAPOLCOM Chairman with Commissioners Guillermo P. Enriquez, Jr., Edgar Dula Torre, Federico S. Comandante and Alexis Canonizado, together with PNP Chief Superintendents Anselmo Avenido, Jr., Efren Fernandez and Rufino G. Ibay, administered the newly created Philippine National Police. Through NAPOLCOM, they issued Resolution No. 93-032 providing clarificatory guidelines on Board of Officers Resolution No. 5 dated January 2, 1992, as amended by Resolution No. 10 dated June 19, 1992. The Resolution declared that CIS agents, including NAPOLCOM operatives, who opted to be absorbed as non-uniformed personnel and were appointed to plantilla positions shall be considered civilian personnel of the PNP covered by civil service laws; that not being uniformed personnel they are not empowered to enforce laws, effect arrest, search and seizures, and investigate crimes; that as civilians they shall be utilized mainly in purely administrative, technical, monitoring or research work; and that assignment of equivalent ranks shall not be construed as investiture of command authority over lower-level uniformed personnel.

According to private respondents, who sued as CIS agents and regular employees, the Resolution violated R.A. No. 6975 and R.A. No. 5750. They maintained that R.A. No. 5750, which granted CIS agents including civilian operatives police powers, had not been repealed by R.A. No. 6975, such that CIS agents absorbed into the PNP still enjoyed those powers. On that basis they filed Civil Case No. Q-93-18393 for Prohibition and Mandamus before respondent Judge Maximiano C. Asuncion of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 104.

Thereafter the trial court issued a Temporary Restraining Order on November 25, 1993 and then a writ of preliminary injunction against implementation. After hearing on the merits, the trial court granted the petition for prohibition and mandamus and permanently enjoined implementation of the Resolution and any phase-out of CIS civilian operatives.

• Validity and Implementation of R.A. No. 6975: Petitioner argued that respondent court erred in not holding that Resolution No. 92-032 does not violate R.A. No. 6975 but actually implements it.

• Non-Repeal of R.A. No. 5750: Respondent countered that the Resolution violates R.A. No. 6975 and R.A. No. 5750, the law governing CIS agents.
• Retention of Police Powers: Respondent maintained that R.A. No. 5750, which granted CIS agents including civilian operatives police powers, has not been repealed by R.A. No. 6975, such that CIS agents absorbed into the PNP still enjoy the police powers granted by R.A. No. 5750.

• Validity of Resolution No. 93-032: Whether NAPOLCOM Resolution No. 93-032 classifying CIS agents absorbed as non-uniformed PNP personnel as civilians without police powers violates R.A. No. 6975.

• Validity of Resolution No. 93-032: No. The Resolution does not violate R.A. No. 6975 but implements it, R.A. No. 5750 having been repealed by revision and police powers having been reserved to uniformed PNP personnel.

• Validity of Resolution No. 93-032: R.A. No. 6975, enacted pursuant to the constitutional mandate for one police force, created the PNP and absorbed the former National Police Commission, Philippine Constabulary and Integrated National Police, all of which were abolished. Because a subsequent statute revising the whole subject matter and evidently intended as a substitute operates to repeal the earlier statute, R.A. No. 6975 repealed R.A. No. 5750; with the abolition of the Constabulary including its CIS, R.A. No. 5750 governing CIS civilian agents was rendered inutile and lost its raison d'etre. Point-by-point comparison confirmed supersession: Section 30 of R.A. No. 6975 superseded Section 1 of R.A. No. 5750 on qualifications; the Deputy Chief position under Section 2 no longer exists as the Criminal Investigation Unit head is now a Director with rank of chief superintendent under Section 35(b)(4); the compliance period under Section 4 is no longer available except for alternative educational requirements for those already in service; and police, oath and subpoena powers under Sections 5 and 6 are now provided under Section 24. Rejection of the trial court's view that repeal cannot be assumed without express provision was therefore required. Moreover, the Resolution strips no vested right because it denies police powers only to those who opted not to join uniformed personnel, consistent with R.A. No. 6975 envisioning the PNP as a single national police organization composed entirely of uniformed personnel governed by one set of standards and covered by its own retirement and disciplinary systems. Under Section 88, absorbed personnel continue only in a holdover capacity, necessarily implying their duties and responsibilities may be modified, changed or completely removed.

• Repeal by revision or substitution — A subsequent statute revising the whole subject matter of a former statute and evidently intended as a substitute operates to repeal the earlier statute; the revising statute is a legislative declaration that what is embraced therein shall prevail and what is excluded is discarded. Applied to hold that R.A. No. 6975, which revised the whole police force system and substituted a new unified PNP, repealed R.A. No. 5750 even without express repeal, confirmed by point-by-point supersession of its provisions.
• Holdover capacity of absorbed personnel under Section 88, R.A. No. 6975 — Personnel of a transferred, merged or absorbed office who are not removed for cause and after due process continue in a holdover capacity to perform their duties and receive salaries and benefits. Applied to hold that private respondents had no vested right to retain police functions, as holdover duties may be modified, changed or completely removed, as done by Resolution No. 93-032 for those opting for non-uniformed status.
• PNP as single uniformed police organization — R.A. No. 6975 envisioned the PNP as a single national police organization composed entirely of uniformed personnel appointed to police ranks under one set of standards and its own retirement and disciplinary systems. Applied to sustain reservation of law enforcement, arrest, search and seizure, and criminal investigation powers to uniformed personnel and utilization of non-uniformed civilian personnel mainly in administrative, technical, monitoring or research work.

• "a subsequent statute revising the whole subject matter of a former statute, and evidently intended as a substitute for it, operates to repeal the earlier statute." — States the controlling test for implied repeal by revision relied upon to find R.A. No. 5750 repealed by R.A. No. 6975.
• "The revising statute is in effect a legislative declaration that whatever is embraced in the new statute shall prevail, and whatever is excluded therefrom is discarded." — Defines the effect of a revising statute, supporting exclusion of the old CIS civilian-agent regime from the new PNP system.
• "R.A. No. 6975 envisioned the PNP as a single national police organization, composed entirely of uniformed personnel who are to be appointed to their respective police ranks, governed by one set of standards and covered by its own retirement and disciplinary systems." — Articulates the statutory conception justifying denial of police powers to non-uniformed personnel under the questioned Resolution.
• "who shall, unless removed for cause and after due process, in a holdover capacity, continue to perform their respective duties and responsibilities and receive their corresponding salaries and benefits." — Quotes Section 88 to establish that absorbed personnel had no vested right to immutable duties.

• People vs. Almuete, G.R. No. L-26551, 69 SCRA 410, 414 [1976] — Cited as authority for the rule that a subsequent statute revising the whole subject matter and intended as a substitute repeals the earlier statute.

• Section 6, Article XVI, Constitution — Mandates establishment and maintenance of one police force; cited as the constitutional basis urging promulgation of R.A. No. 6975 creating the PNP.
• Section 14, R.A. No. 6975 — Cited in the Resolution together with the constitutional mandate as source of NAPOLCOM power to administer and control the PNP.
• Sections 24, 30, 35(b)(4) and 88, 90, R.A. No. 6975 — Sections 30, 35(b)(4) and 24 were held to supersede qualification, organizational and police-power provisions of R.A. No. 5750; Section 88 on transfer and holdover status was held to negate vested rights; Section 90 on abolition of prior agencies supported repeal.
• Sections 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6, R.A. No. 5750 — Law on qualifications, Deputy Chief position, compliance period, police powers, and oath and subpoena powers of CIS civilian agents; held superseded and rendered inutile by abolition of the CIS and enactment of R.A. No. 6975.

Davide, Jr., C.J., Puno, Kapunan and Pardo, JJ., concur.