Binamira vs. Garrucho

The Court held that a designation to a public office made by an official other than the one vested by law with the appointing power is invalid and does not confer security of tenure. Specifically, under Section 23-A of P.D. No. 564, the appointment of the PTA General Manager is a discretionary power that must be exercised personally by the President and cannot be delegated to a subordinate, such as the Minister of Tourism.

Ramon P. Binamira was designated as General Manager of the Philippine Tourism Authority (PTA) by Minister of Tourism Jose Antonio Gonzales on April 7, 1986. President Corazon C. Aquino later approved the composition of the PTA Board of Directors, which included Binamira as Vice-Chairman by virtue of his position as General Manager. Binamira served in this capacity until January 1990, when the new Secretary of Tourism, Peter D. Garrucho, Jr., demanded his resignation. On January 4, 1990, President Aquino issued a memorandum to Secretary Garrucho stating that Binamira's designation was invalid because it was not made by the President as required by P.D. No. 564, and concurrently designated Garrucho as General Manager.

• On April 7, 1986, Minister of Tourism Jose Antonio Gonzales issued a memorandum designating Ramon P. Binamira as General Manager of the PTA.
• On April 10, 1986, Minister Gonzales sought and obtained President Aquino's approval of the PTA Board of Directors composition, which listed Binamira as Vice-Chairman in his capacity as General Manager.
• Binamira assumed office and discharged the duties of General Manager and Vice-Chairman.
• On January 2, 1990, respondent Peter D. Garrucho, Jr., as the new Secretary of Tourism, demanded Binamira's resignation.
• On January 4, 1990, President Aquino issued a memorandum to Secretary Garrucho stating that Binamira's designation was invalid because it was not made by the President as required by P.D. No. 564, and designated Garrucho as General Manager concurrently.
• Garrucho took over as General Manager.
• On April 6, 1990, President Aquino appointed Jose A. Capistrano as General Manager.

• Petitioner maintained that his designation by the Minister of Tourism was valid and constituted a permanent appointment, conferring upon him security of tenure.
• He argued that the Minister's act was the act of the President under the alter ego doctrine, as the Minister was an agent of the Chief Executive.
• He contended that President Aquino's subsequent approval of the PTA Board of Directors composition, which included him as Vice-Chairman, ratified his designation.

• Respondent countered that the designation was invalid because Section 23-A of P.D. No. 564 exclusively vests the power to appoint the PTA General Manager in the President.
• He argued that the power of appointment is discretionary and non-delegable; therefore, the Minister of Tourism could not validly exercise it.
• He asserted that even if considered an appointment, the designation was merely temporary or acting and could be withdrawn at will by the appointing authority.

• Procedural Issues: N/A
• Substantive Issues:
  • Whether the designation of petitioner as PTA General Manager by the Minister of Tourism was valid and conferred security of tenure.
  • Whether the power to appoint the PTA General Manager could be validly exercised by the Minister of Tourism.

• Procedural: N/A
• Substantive:
  • The Court ruled that the designation was invalid. Section 23-A of P.D. No. 564 expressly requires the General Manager to be appointed by the President. The power of appointment involves the exercise of discretion, which is non-delegable.
  • The Court distinguished between "appointment" and "designation." An appointment confers security of tenure, while a designation connotes the imposition of additional duties on an incumbent official and is temporary in nature, not conferring security of tenure.
  • The Court held that the alter ego doctrine did not validate the designation. While the acts of a department head are presumptively the acts of the President, this presumption applies only when the acts are performed in the regular course of business and are not disapproved or reprobated by the Chief Executive. President Aquino's memorandum of January 4, 1990, expressly disapproved and invalidated the designation.
  • The Court found that President Aquino's approval of the Board composition did not constitute ratification of the invalid designation, as the petitioner's inclusion as Vice-Chairman was contingent on his invalid designation as General Manager.

• Non-Delegability of Discretionary Power of Appointment — The Court reiterated that where the law vests the power of appointment in a specific official, that power involves the exercise of personal discretion and judgment and cannot be delegated to a subordinate unless expressly authorized. The appointment of the PTA General Manager by the President is such a discretionary power.
• Distinction Between Appointment and Designation — The Court defined appointment as the selection by the competent authority of an individual to exercise the functions of a public office, which results in security of tenure. Designation, in contrast, merely imposes additional duties on an incumbent official and is temporary, not conferring security of tenure.
• Alter Ego Doctrine (Qualified) — The Court cited Villena v. Secretary of the Interior for the principle that the acts of department heads, performed in the regular course of business, are presumptively the acts of the President. However, the Court qualified this by stating that such acts are valid only if not disapproved or reprobated by the Chief Executive.

• "Appointment involves the exercise of discretion, which because of its nature cannot be delegated. Legally speaking, it was not possible for Minister Gonzales to assume the exercise of that discretion as an alter ego of the President." — This passage underscores the core legal rationale for invalidating the designation.
• "Designation, on the other hand, connotes merely the imposition by law of additional duties on an incumbent official... In this sense, the designation is considered only an acting or temporary appointment, which does not confer security of tenure on the person named." — This provides the critical definition that determined the petitioner's lack of tenure.

• Villena v. Secretary of the Interior, 67 Phil. 451 — Cited for the alter ego doctrine explaining the relationship between the President and Cabinet members. The Court used this precedent but distinguished it by noting that the doctrine includes the condition that presidential disapproval nullifies the department head's act.

• Section 23-A, P.D. No. 564 (as amended by P.D. 1400) — The governing statute creating the Philippine Tourism Authority. It provides that the General Manager "shall be appointed by the President of the Philippines." This was the central legal basis for the Court's ruling.