Gaminde vs. Commission on Audit

The terms of office of the first appointees to the Constitutional Commissions under the 1987 Constitution commence on February 2, 1987, the date of the Constitution's ratification, irrespective of the actual dates of appointment or qualification of the appointees, and any interval between the start of the term and the actual qualification of the appointee is counted against the latter. A commissioner who continues to hold office after the expiration of her term, in good faith reliance on an advisory opinion of the Office of the President, is a de facto officer entitled to receive salary and emoluments for services actually rendered.

Thelma P. Gaminde was appointed ad interim Commissioner of the Civil Service Commission on June 11, 1993, by President Fidel V. Ramos, succeeding Commissioner Samilo N. Barlongay whose line of succession carried a five-year term under the rotational system prescribed by Article IX-B, Section 1(2) of the 1987 Constitution. The 1987 Constitution introduced a staggered 7-5-3 year term system for the Chairman and Commissioners of the Civil Service Commission, designed to ensure a regular two-year interval between expirations of terms so that no single President could appoint more than one permanent member. Article XVIII, Section 15 of the Transitory Provisions allowed incumbent members of the Constitutional Commissions to continue in office for one year after ratification, creating a potential tension between the holdover period and the commencement of the new constitutional terms.

On June 11, 1993, President Fidel V. Ramos appointed Thelma P. Gaminde ad interim Commissioner of the Civil Service Commission. Her appointment paper expressly stated that she was appointed "for a term expiring February 2, 1999." She assumed office on June 22, 1993, after taking her oath, and the Commission on Appointments confirmed her appointment on September 7, 1993.

On February 24, 1998, Gaminde sought clarification from the Office of the President regarding the expiry date of her term. In a letter dated April 7, 1998, Deputy Executive Secretary and Chief Presidential Legal Counsel Renato C. Corona opined that her term would expire on February 2, 2000, not February 2, 1999, reasoning that the terms of the first appointees under the 1987 Constitution commenced on February 2, 1988, after the one-year holdover period of incumbent commissioners under Section 15, Article XVIII. Relying on this advisory opinion, Gaminde remained in office after February 2, 1999.

On February 4, 1999, CSC Chairman Corazon Alma G. de Leon wrote the Commission on Audit requesting an opinion on whether Gaminde and her co-terminous staff could be paid their salaries notwithstanding the expiration of their appointments on February 2, 1999. On February 18, 1999, the COA General Counsel issued an opinion that Gaminde's term had expired on February 2, 1999 as stated in her appointment paper, conformably with the constitutional intent. Consequently, on March 24, 1999, CSC Resident Auditor Flovitas U. Felipe issued Notice of Disallowance No. 99-002-101 (99), disallowing in audit the salaries and emoluments of Gaminde and her co-terminous staff effective February 2, 1999.

Gaminde appealed the disallowance to the COA en banc on April 5, 1999. On June 15, 1999, the COA issued Decision No. 99-090 dismissing the appeal, holding that the term of office could be determined by reference to the appointment paper, which set the expiration date on February 2, 1999, and that the COA was without power to recognize an extension of her term even with the implied acquiescence of the Office of the President. Her motion for reconsideration was denied by the COA on August 17, 1999 in Decision No. 99-129. The Solicitor General, instead of filing a comment on behalf of respondents, filed a Manifestation praying that the petition be granted, agreeing with Gaminde's position that her term expired on February 2, 2000 and that the COA had no authority to disregard the clarification issued by the Office of the President.

• Expiration of Term: Petitioner maintained that her term of office as CSC Commissioner expired on February 2, 2000, not February 2, 1999, arguing that the terms of the first appointees under the 1987 Constitution commenced on February 2, 1988, after the one-year holdover period of incumbent commissioners under Section 15, Article XVIII, and not on February 2, 1987, the date of ratification.
• Clarificatory Ruling of the Office of the President: Petitioner argued that the clarificatory ruling dated April 7, 1998, issued by Deputy Executive Secretary and Chief Presidential Legal Counsel Renato C. Corona, corrected the expiration date in her original appointment paper and should be respected by the COA, whose function is limited to auditing.
• Entitlement to Salaries: Petitioner contended that she rendered services in good faith as CSC Commissioner from February 2, 1999 to February 2, 2000, and was therefore entitled to receive her salary and other emoluments for actual services rendered.

• Appointment Paper Controls: Respondent COA argued that the issue of petitioner's term of office could be properly addressed by mere reference to her appointment paper, which expressly set the expiration date on February 2, 1999.
• No Power to Extend Term: Respondent COA maintained that it was bereft of power to recognize an extension of petitioner's term, not even with the implied acquiescence of the Office of the President.
• Preservation of Rotational Interval: Respondent COA contended that the terms of the first appointees under the 1987 Constitution must be reckoned from February 2, 1987, the date of ratification, to preserve the two-year rotational interval, and that any prior error in reckoning could not be corrected by allowing Gaminde to hold over until February 2, 2000.

• Commencement of Constitutional Terms: Whether the terms of office of the first appointees to the Civil Service Commission under the 1987 Constitution commenced on February 2, 1987, the date of ratification, or on February 2, 1988, after the one-year holdover period under Section 15, Article XVIII.
• Expiration of Gaminde's Term: Whether petitioner's term as CSC Commissioner expired on February 2, 1999, as stated in her appointment paper, or on February 2, 2000, as claimed by her and as clarified by the Office of the President.
• Validity of COA Disallowance: Whether the COA properly disallowed the salaries and emoluments of petitioner and her co-terminous staff for the period after February 2, 1999.

• Commencement of Constitutional Terms: Yes. The terms of the first appointees to the Constitutional Commissions under the 1987 Constitution commenced on February 2, 1987, the date of the Constitution's ratification, irrespective of the actual dates of appointment or qualification, to preserve the two-year rotational interval mandated by Article IX-B, Section 1(2).
• Expiration of Gaminde's Term: February 2, 1999. Petitioner's term expired on February 2, 1999, as stated in her appointment paper, the five-year term of her line of succession having commenced on February 2, 1987 and expired on February 2, 1992, with her successor's term running from February 2, 1992 to February 2, 1999.
• Validity of COA Disallowance: No, in part. The COA erred in disallowing the salaries and emoluments of Gaminde and her co-terminous staff from February 2, 1999 to February 2, 2000, because she served as a de facto officer in good faith and was entitled to compensation for services actually rendered.

• Commencement of Constitutional Terms: The rotational plan for the membership of the Constitutional Commissions requires two indispensable conditions: first, that the terms of the first three Commissioners should start on a common date, and second, that any vacancy before expiration of the term should be filled only for the unexpired balance. Applying these conditions, the appropriate starting point of the terms of the first appointees under the 1987 Constitution is February 2, 1987, the date of adoption of the Constitution. The plain language of Article IX-B, Section 1(2) uniformly prescribes a seven-year term without reappointment, with the first appointees serving terms of seven, five, and three years respectively. There is no need to expressly state the beginning of the term, as it is understood to coincide with the effectivity of the Constitution upon ratification. In case of belated appointment or qualification, the interval between the start of the term and actual qualification is counted against the appointee. The transitory provisions of Section 15, Article XVIII govern only the tenure of incumbent commissioners, not the constitutional term of the office itself. The term "unless" in the transitory provision imports an exception, meaning incumbent members shall continue in office for one year unless sooner removed for cause, incapacitated, or appointed to a new term — all of which may occur before the end of the one-year period. These provisions do not affect the term of office fixed in Article IX.

• Expiration of Gaminde's Term: The second line of succession (five-year term) commenced on February 2, 1987 and expired on February 2, 1992. Commissioner Barlongay, the first appointee to this line, was nominated on January 30, 1988, confirmed on February 17, 1988, and assumed office on March 4, 1988. His term ended on February 2, 1992, though he served as de facto Commissioner until March 4, 1993. Gaminde was appointed on June 11, 1993, for a term expiring February 2, 1999, as expressly stated in her appointment paper. She accepted the appointment and assumed office on June 22, 1993. She is bound by the term of the appointment she accepted. The letter of Deputy Executive Secretary Renato C. Corona dated April 7, 1998, clarifying that her term would expire on February 2, 2000, was in error, because what was submitted to the Commission on Appointments was a nomination for a term expiring on February 2, 1999. Her successor's term must therefore be deemed to start on February 2, 1999, and expire on February 2, 2006, maintaining the two-year interval.

• Validity of COA Disallowance: Although Gaminde's term expired on February 2, 1999, she remained in office until February 2, 2000, relying in good faith on the advisory opinion of the Office of the President. She thus served as a de facto officer in good faith and was entitled to receive her salary and other emoluments for actual services rendered. The COA therefore erred in disallowing in audit such salary and other emoluments, including those of her co-terminous staff, for the period from February 2, 1999 to February 2, 2000.

• Rotational Plan for Constitutional Commissions — The operation of the rotational plan for the membership of the Constitutional Commissions requires two indispensable conditions: (1) that the terms of the first three Commissioners should start on a common date, and (2) that any vacancy due to death, resignation, or disability before expiration of the term should be filled only for the unexpired balance of the term. Without these conditions, the regularity of the intervals between appointments would be destroyed, frustrating the constitutional purpose of preventing any single administration from appointing more than one permanent member. The Court applied this doctrine by fixing February 2, 1987 — the date of ratification of the 1987 Constitution — as the common starting point for the terms of all first appointees to the Constitutional Commissions.

• Distinction Between Term and Tenure — The term of an office must be distinguished from the tenure of the incumbent. The term means the time during which the officer may claim to hold office as of right, and fixes the interval after which the several incumbents shall succeed one another. The tenure represents the period during which the incumbent actually holds the office. The term of office is not affected by hold-over. The tenure may be shorter than the term for reasons within or beyond the power of the incumbent. The Court applied this distinction by holding that the transitory provisions of Section 15, Article XVIII govern the tenure of incumbent commissioners (allowing them to continue for one year), but do not affect the constitutional term of office fixed in Article IX, which commences on the date of ratification.

• De Facto Officer in Good Faith — An officer who continues to hold office after the expiration of her term, in good faith reliance on an advisory opinion of the appointing power, is a de facto officer entitled to receive salary and emoluments for services actually rendered. The Court applied this principle to Gaminde, who remained in office from February 2, 1999 to February 2, 2000, relying on the clarification issued by the Office of the President, and held that the COA erred in disallowing her compensation for that period.

• "the operation of the rotational plan requires two conditions, both indispensable to its workability: (1) that the terms of the first three (3) Commissioners should start on a common date, and, (2) that any vacancy due to death, resignation or disability before the expiration of the term should only be filled only for the unexpired balance of the term." — This passage, quoting Republic vs. Imperial, articulates the foundational requirements for the rotational system of Constitutional Commission membership and is central to the Court's rationale for fixing the common starting date of terms.

• "[T]he term of an office must be distinguished from the tenure of the incumbent. The term means the time during which the officer may claim to hold office as of right, and fixes the interval after which the several incumbents shall succeed one another. The tenure represents the term during which the incumbent actually holds the office." — This passage defines the canonical distinction between term and tenure, which the Court used to separate the effect of the transitory provisions (governing tenure) from the constitutional term of office (governing the rotational interval).

• "the appropriate starting point of the terms of office of the first appointees to the Constitutional Commissions under the 1987 Constitution must be on February 02, 1987, the date of the adoption of the 1987 Constitution. In case of a belated appointment or qualification, the interval between the start of the term and the actual qualification of the appointee must be counted against the latter." — This passage states the Court's ruling on when constitutional terms commence and how belated appointments are treated, establishing the controlling rule for computing the terms of all Constitutional Commission members under the 1987 Constitution.

• Republic vs. Imperial, 96 Phil. 770 (1955) — Controlling precedent. The Court relied on this case for the two indispensable conditions of the rotational plan: (1) terms of the first three Commissioners must start on a common date, and (2) vacancies must be filled only for the unexpired balance. The principle was applied to fix February 2, 1987 as the common starting date for all first appointees to the Constitutional Commissions under the 1987 Constitution.
• Topacio Nueno vs. Angeles, 76 Phil. 12 (1946) — Cited for the settled distinction between "term" and "tenure" in the law of public officers, which the Court used to separate the effect of the transitory provisions from the constitutional term of office.
• Visarra vs. Miraflor, 118 Phil. 1 (1963) — Cited in support of the three-tiered system of succession for the Chairman and members of the Civil Service Commission, illustrating the line of succession and the maintenance of the two-year interval.

• Article IX-B, Section 1(2), 1987 Constitution — Prescribes that the Chairman and Commissioners of the Civil Service Commission shall be appointed by the President with the consent of the Commission on Appointments for a term of seven years without reappointment, with the first appointees serving terms of seven, five, and three years respectively, and that appointment to any vacancy shall be only for the unexpired term of the predecessor. The Court applied this provision to establish the staggered 7-5-3 year rotational system and to compute Gaminde's term as expiring on February 2, 1999.
• Article XVIII, Section 15, 1987 Constitution (Transitory Provisions) — Provides that incumbent members of the Civil Service Commission, the Commission on Elections, and the Commission on Audit shall continue in office for one year after ratification of the Constitution, unless sooner removed for cause, incapacitated, or appointed to a new term thereunder, and in no case shall any member serve longer than seven years including service before ratification. The Court held that this provision governs the tenure of incumbent commissioners, not the constitutional term of office, and does not affect the commencement of terms fixed in Article IX-B.
• Article X, Section 1, 1935 Constitution (as amended) — Cited as the historical origin of the rotational system for constitutional commissions, having introduced staggered terms for the Commission on Elections, which was later adopted for the Civil Service Commission under the 1973 and 1987 Constitutions.

Davide, Jr., C.J., Melo, Vitug, Kapunan, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Buena, Gonzaga-Reyes, and Ynares-Santiago, JJ., concurred. Puno, J., concurred in the result. Bellosillo, J., took no part, being related to one of the parties.

• De Leon, Jr., J. — Justice De Leon dissented from the ponencia insofar as it held that Gaminde's term expired on February 2, 1999, and that the terms of the first set of CSC Commissioners commenced on February 2, 1987. He argued that Article IX-B, Section 1(2) should be read in conjunction with Section 15, Article XVIII, such that the one-year holdover period of incumbent commissioners under the transitory provisions was separate from the terms of the first appointees, and that the terms of the first appointees therefore commenced on February 2, 1988, not February 2, 1987. Under this reading, Commissioner Barlongay's five-year term expired on February 2, 1993, and Gaminde's appointment replacing him was for a term of seven years expiring on February 2, 2000. Justice De Leon further argued that the clarificatory ruling of the Office of the President dated April 7, 1998, which corrected the expiration date in Gaminde's appointment paper to February 2, 2000, should have been respected by the COA, whose function is limited to auditing. He concurred with the ponencia insofar as it held that the salaries and emoluments received by Gaminde after February 2, 1999 should not be disallowed. Mendoza, J., joined De Leon's dissent.