Atienza vs. Villarosa

Under Republic Act No. 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991), the Vice-Governor, as presiding officer of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, has the exclusive authority to approve purchase orders for the procurement of supplies and materials necessary for the operation of the legislative body, and to appoint officials and employees thereof whose salaries are paid from funds appropriated for the Sanggunian, independent from the authority of the Governor as local chief executive.

The case arose from the structural reorganization of local government units under Republic Act No. 7160, which replaced Batas Pambansa Blg. 337. Under the old Code, the Governor served as presiding officer of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, merging executive and legislative functions. RA 7160 introduced a system of decentralization by making the Vice-Governor the presiding officer of the legislative body, distinct from the Governor's executive role, to ensure checks and balances and more responsive local governance.

• Petitioner Ramon M. Atienza served as Vice-Governor and respondent Jose T. Villarosa served as Governor of the Province of Occidental Mindoro.
• On June 25, 2002, Governor Villarosa issued a Memorandum directing that all Purchase Orders for supplies, materials, equipment, fuel, repairs, and maintenance needed by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan must be approved by him as local chief executive, citing DILG Opinion No. 148-1993.
• Vice-Governor Atienza objected, claiming that under DILG Opinion No. 96-1995 and COA Opinions, he had authority to sign purchase orders as head of the legislative branch, citing Sections 466 and 468 of RA 7160 regarding separation of powers.
• On July 1, 2002, Governor Villarosa issued another Memorandum terminating the contracts of all casual and job order employees appointed by Vice-Governor Atienza, claiming these appointments were unauthorized and created an excessive bureaucracy, but offering to allow four employees for the Vice-Governor and one for each Sanggunian member subject to his approval.
• On July 3, 2002, Governor Villarosa issued a third Memorandum enforcing compliance with the previous memoranda regarding purchase orders and employee terminations.
• Vice-Governor Atienza invoked the principle of separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches of the local government unit and requested the Governor to reconsider, but the Governor insisted on compliance.
• Atienza filed a petition for prohibition with the Court of Appeals to enjoin the implementation of the June 25 and July 1, 2002 Memoranda.
• The terms of both officials expired on June 30, 2004, rendering the case technically moot, but the Supreme Court proceeded to resolve the issues to formulate controlling principles.

• The Vice-Governor has authority to approve purchase orders for the Sangguniang Panlalawigan under Section 466(a)(1) of RA 7160, which grants him the power to sign all warrants drawn on the provincial treasury for expenditures appropriated for the operation of the Sanggunian.
• The Governor's reliance on Section 344 of RA 7160 is misplaced because the Vice-Governor, as head of the legislative department with administrative control over Sanggunian funds, is the "head of the department or office" contemplated therein for approving vouchers.
• The Vice-Governor has exclusive appointing authority over officials and employees of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan under Section 466(a)(2) of RA 7160, independent of the Governor's powers under Section 465(b)(v).
• The issue regarding the July 1, 2002 Memorandum is not moot because appointments are made every six months for casual employees and per job order, making the Governor's continued usurpation of appointing power a recurring issue capable of repetition yet evading review.
• The assailed memoranda violate the constitutional principle of separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches in local government units.

• The approval of purchase orders is distinct from the power to sign warrants under Section 466(a)(1), and Section 344 requires approval of disbursement vouchers by the local chief executive (Governor) whenever local funds are disbursed.
• Section 361 regarding requisitioning is inapplicable because requisitioning is different from approval of purchase orders.
• The July 1, 2002 Memorandum had already been implemented and the employees terminated, rendering the issue moot and academic as there is nothing more to restrain.
• While conceding that the Vice-Governor has appointing power over Sanggunian employees, the Governor argued this does not extend to employees of the Office of the Vice-Governor.
• The Memorandum was issued to prevent excessive bureaucracy and unauthorized appointments, and the Governor retains authority over provincial funds and employees paid therefrom.

• Procedural Issues: Whether the petition for prohibition had become moot and academic due to the expiration of the parties' terms of office and the termination of the employees subject of the July 1, 2002 Memorandum.
• Substantive Issues:
  • Who between the Governor and Vice-Governor is authorized to approve purchase orders issued in connection with the procurement of supplies, materials, equipment, including fuel, repairs and maintenance of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan?
  • Does the Governor, as local chief executive, have the authority to terminate or cancel the appointments of casual/job order employees of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan Members and the Office of the Vice-Governor?

• Procedural: Although the expiration of the parties' terms of office on June 30, 2004 rendered the case moot, the Supreme Court exercised its discretion to resolve the legal issues raised because they are capable of repetition yet evading review, and there is a compelling need to clarify the scope of powers of local officials under RA 7160 to guide the bench, bar, and public.
• Substantive:
  • The Vice-Governor, not the Governor, has authority to approve purchase orders for the Sangguniang Panlalawigan. Section 344 of RA 7160 requires vouchers to be approved by the head of the department with administrative control of the funds. As presiding officer of the Sanggunian, the Vice-Governor has administrative control over its funds. Under the doctrine of necessary implication, the express authority to approve disbursement vouchers and sign warrants for Sanggunian expenditures necessarily includes the authority to approve purchase orders to cause the delivery of supplies.
  • The Governor has no authority to terminate or cancel appointments of casual/job order employees of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan. Section 466(a)(2) vests exclusive appointing power in the Vice-Governor for Sanggunian officials and employees, while Section 465(b)(v) grants the Governor power only over employees paid from provincial funds. The determining factor is the budget source: if salaries are charged against Sanggunian appropriations, the Vice-Governor appoints; if against provincial funds, the Governor appoints. The July 1, 2002 Memorandum was void because it absolutely prohibited the Vice-Governor from exercising his appointing power and restricted it to a recommendatory nature.

• Doctrine of Necessary Implication — What is implied in a statute is as much a part thereof as that which is expressed. Every statutory grant of power includes all incidental powers necessary to effectuate its object and purpose. The greater power (to approve disbursement vouchers and sign warrants) includes the lesser power (to approve purchase orders).
• Separation of Powers in Local Government Units — RA 7160 disbanded the union of legislative and executive powers that existed under BP 337, establishing distinct and non-intermingling official personalities to ensure check and balance and better delivery of public service.
• Mootness Exception (Capable of Repetition Yet Evading Review) — Courts will decide questions otherwise moot and academic if the issue is capable of repetition yet evading review, particularly when necessary to guide the bench and bar.

• "No statute can be enacted that can provide all the details involved in its application... What is implied in a statute is as much a part thereof as that which is expressed."
• "With Rep. Act No. 7160, the union of legislative and executive powers in the office of the local chief executive under the BP Blg. 337 has been disbanded, so that either department now comprises different and non-intermingling official personalities with the end in view of ensuring a better delivery of public service and provide a system of check and balance between the two."
• "The avowed intent of Rep. Act. No. 7160, therefore, is to vest on the Sangguniang Panlalawigan independence in the exercise of its legislative functions vis-a-vis the discharge by the Governor of the executive functions."

• Province of Batangas v. Romulo — Cited for the principle that courts may resolve moot cases to formulate controlling principles when there is a compelling reason, and for the "capable of repetition yet evading review" doctrine.
• Chua v. Civil Service Commission — Cited for the definition and application of the doctrine of necessary implication in statutory construction.
• Gamboa, Jr. v. Aguirre, Jr. — Cited regarding the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches under RA 7160 and the historical context of the change from BP 337.

• Section 344, RA 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991) — Provisions on certification and approval of vouchers; interpreted to mean that the Vice-Governor, as head of the legislative department with administrative control over Sanggunian funds, approves disbursement vouchers for Sanggunian operations.
• Section 465(b)(v), RA 7160 — Grants the Governor power to appoint officials and employees whose salaries are wholly or mainly paid out of provincial funds.
• Section 466(a)(1), RA 7160 — Grants the Vice-Governor power to sign all warrants drawn on the provincial treasury for expenditures appropriated for the operation of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan.
• Section 466(a)(2), RA 7160 — Grants the Vice-Governor power to appoint all officials and employees of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan subject to civil service law.
• Section 361, RA 7160 — Discussed regarding approval of requisitions; distinguished from approval of purchase orders.
• Article X, Section 3, 1987 Constitution — Constitutional mandate for decentralization and responsive local government structure.
• Section 39, COA Manual on the New Government Accounting System for Local Government Units — Provides that disbursement vouchers for expenditures appropriated for the operation of the Sanggunian shall be approved by the Vice-Governor.