Matibag vs. Benipayo

An ad interim appointment is a permanent appointment because it takes effect immediately and can no longer be withdrawn by the President once the appointee has qualified into office. It is distinct from a temporary or acting appointment which is revocable at will, and the constitutional prohibition on temporary appointments to the COMELEC does not apply to ad interim appointments.

The case arose during the May 2001 national election period when three vacancies occurred in the COMELEC due to the expiration of terms following the Gaminde ruling (which held that terms of constitutional officers are counted from February 2, 1987). President Arroyo appointed Benipayo, Borra, and Tuason ad interim to fill these vacancies. Congress adjourned without the Commission on Appointments acting on these appointments, leading to multiple renewals of the ad interim appointments to prevent disruption of election duties.

• Filed directly with the SC as an original Petition for Prohibition under Rule 65 on August 3, 2001
• No prior lower court proceedings; elevated directly to the SC due to transcendental importance involving the conduct of the May 2001 elections

• Petitioner Matibag was appointed Acting Director IV of the COMELEC Education and Information Department (EID) on February 2, 1999, and renewed in a "Temporary" capacity on February 15, 2000 and February 15, 2001
• On March 22, 2001, President Arroyo appointed Benipayo as COMELEC Chairman and Borra and Tuason as Commissioners ad interim for terms expiring February 2, 2008
• The Commission on Appointments did not act on these appointments before Congress adjourned
• On June 1, 2001, President Arroyo renewed the ad interim appointments; Congress adjourned again without action
• On June 8, 2001, President Arroyo renewed the appointments a third time; Congress adjourned again without action
• On September 6, 2001, President Arroyo renewed the appointments a fourth time
• On April 11, 2001, Benipayo issued a memorandum designating Cinco as Officer-in-Charge of the EID and reassigning Matibag to the Law Department
• Matibag questioned the reassignment, citing Civil Service Memorandum Circular No. 7 prohibiting transfers during the election period (January 2 to June 13, 2001), but Benipayo denied her request citing COMELEC Resolution No. 3300 which exempted COMELEC from such prohibition
• Matibag filed the instant petition questioning the constitutionality of the ad interim appointments and their renewals, as well as the legality of her reassignment and the disbursement of salaries to the respondents

• Ad interim appointments to the COMELEC are temporary appointments prohibited by Section 1(2), Article IX-C of the Constitution because they can be withdrawn by the President at her pleasure or disapproved by the Commission on Appointments
• The successive renewals of the ad interim appointments violate the constitutional prohibition on reappointment under Section 1(2), Article IX-C
• Benipayo lacked authority to reassign her without approval of the COMELEC en banc as a collegial body
• The reassignment during the election period violated Section 261(h) of the Omnibus Election Code and Civil Service rules
• Disbursements of salaries to Benipayo, Borra, Tuason, and Cinco were illegal

• The petition fails to satisfy the requisites for judicial review: petitioner lacks personal and substantial interest (no claim to the positions held by respondents), the constitutional issue was not raised at the earliest opportunity (filed August 2001 despite March appointments), and the constitutional issue is not the lis mota (the real issue being the legality of reassignment)
• Ad interim appointments are permanent, not temporary; they take effect immediately and are irrevocable once the appointee qualifies, terminating only upon disapproval by the Commission on Appointments or adjournment of Congress
• Renewals of by-passed ad interim appointments are allowed because there is no final disapproval; the prohibition on reappointment applies only to confirmed appointments
• The COMELEC Chairman, as Chief Executive Officer under the Revised Administrative Code, has the authority to transfer or reassign personnel without en banc approval
• COMELEC Resolution No. 3300 validly exempted COMELEC from Section 261(h) of the Omnibus Election Code regarding transfers during election periods

• Procedural Issues:
  • Whether the petition satisfies the requisites for judicial review (actual controversy, standing, lis mota, earliest opportunity)
• Substantive Issues:
  • Whether ad interim appointments to the COMELEC constitute temporary appointments prohibited by Section 1(2), Article IX-C of the Constitution
  • Whether the renewal of ad interim appointments violates the prohibition on reappointment under Section 1(2), Article IX-C of the Constitution
  • Whether the COMELEC Chairman has the authority to reassign personnel without approval of the COMELEC en banc
  • Whether the reassignment violated Section 261(h) of the Omnibus Election Code
  • Whether the Officer-in-Charge of the COMELEC Finance Services Department acted in excess of jurisdiction in disbursing salaries to respondents

• Procedural: The petition satisfies all requisites for judicial review. Petitioner has standing because the validity of her reassignment hinges on the validity of Benipayo’s appointment as Chairman; she has a personal and substantial interest in the resolution. The constitutional issue was raised at the earliest opportunity before the SC, which is the first competent body that could resolve it. The constitutional issue constitutes the lis mota because the legality of the reassignment cannot be determined without resolving the constitutionality of the ad interim appointments.
• Substantive:
  • Ad interim appointments are not temporary: An ad interim appointment is a permanent appointment that takes effect immediately and can no longer be withdrawn by the President once the appointee has qualified. It is distinct from a temporary or acting appointment which is revocable at will. The Constitution prohibits only temporary or acting appointments to constitutional commissions, not ad interim appointments. The term "ad interim" denotes the manner of appointment (made during congressional recess), not the nature of the appointment.
  • Renewal of by-passed appointments allowed: The prohibition on reappointment applies only to appointments confirmed by the Commission on Appointments. An ad interim appointment that is by-passed (not acted upon due to adjournment) does not constitute a term of office; therefore, its renewal does not violate the prohibition on reappointment. A disapproved ad interim appointment cannot be renewed (final decision on the merits), but a by-passed one can be renewed indefinitely until confirmed or disapproved.
  • Chairman's authority to reassign: Under Section 7(4), Chapter 2, Subtitle C, Book V of the Revised Administrative Code, the COMELEC Chairman has the authority to transfer or reassign personnel without approval of the COMELEC en banc.
  • Election period transfer: COMELEC Resolution No. 3300 validly exempted COMELEC from Section 261(h) of the Omnibus Election Code regarding transfers during election periods. The Chairman, as the official authorized to transfer personnel, could implement this resolution without further en banc approval for each transfer.
  • Disbursements: The disbursements were legal because the appointees were validly holding office under permanent ad interim appointments.

• Ad Interim Appointment — A permanent appointment made by the President during the recess of Congress, which takes effect immediately and is irrevocable once the appointee qualifies. It terminates only upon disapproval by the Commission on Appointments or the next adjournment of Congress. It is distinct from a temporary or acting appointment which is revocable at will.
• Prohibition on Temporary/Acting Appointments to Constitutional Commissions — Section 1(2), Article IX-C prohibits appointments or designations in a temporary or acting capacity to the COMELEC to ensure independence and security of tenure. This does not apply to ad interim appointments.
• Prohibition on Reappointment — Applies only to appointments confirmed by the Commission on Appointments. It bars any person who has served any term (full, partial, or unexpired) as COMELEC member from being reappointed to prevent service beyond seven years. It does not apply to by-passed ad interim appointments because no confirmed appointment exists yet.
• Standing in Constitutional Cases — A party must demonstrate a personal and substantial interest in the case such that he has sustained or will sustain direct injury as a result of the governmental act being challenged. Here, petitioner's reassignment depended on the validity of the Chairman's appointment.
• Lis Mota — The constitutional issue must be the very lis mota or controlling issue, not merely collateral. Here, the validity of the reassignment depended on the validity of the ad interim appointment.

• "An ad interim appointment is a permanent appointment because it takes effect immediately and can no longer be withdrawn by the President once the appointee has qualified into office."
• "The term 'ad interim appointment', as used in letters of appointment signed by the President, means a permanent appointment made by the President in the meantime that Congress is in recess."
• "A reappointment presupposes a previous confirmed appointment."
• "The prohibition on reappointment is intended to insure that there will be no reappointment of any kind. On the other hand, the prohibition on temporary or acting appointments is intended to prevent any circumvention of the prohibition on reappointment that may result in an appointee's total term of office exceeding seven years."

• Summers v. Ozaeta (81 Phil. 754) — Established that ad interim appointments are permanent in character and the circumstance that they are subject to confirmation does not alter their permanent nature.
• Brillantes v. Yorac (192 SCRA 358) — Held that designation as Acting Chairman is temporary and revocable at will, violating the constitutional prohibition on temporary appointments to the COMELEC.
• Nacionalista Party v. Bautista (85 Phil. 101) — Declared unconstitutional the designation of an acting COMELEC Commissioner as it undermines independence.
• Guevara v. Inocentes (16 SCRA 379) — Explained that by-passed ad interim appointments may be renewed because the President is free to make new appointments upon adjournment; adjournment is not implied disapproval.
• Gaminde v. Commission on Appointments (347 SCRA 655) — Cited regarding the computation of terms of COMELEC commissioners from February 2, 1987.
• Marohombsar v. Court of Appeals (326 SCRA 62) — Reiterated that ad interim appointments denote the manner of appointment, not the nature, and are permanent until disapproved.

• Article IX-C, Section 1(2) of the Constitution — Provides for the appointment of COMELEC Chairman and Commissioners for seven years without reappointment, and prohibits appointment or designation in a temporary or acting capacity.
• Article VII, Section 16 (Second Paragraph) of the Constitution — Grants the President power to make appointments during the recess of Congress effective until disapproval by the Commission on Appointments or until the next adjournment of Congress.
• Section 261(h) of the Omnibus Election Code — Prohibits transfer of officers and employees in the civil service during the election period without COMELEC approval.
• Section 7(4), Chapter 2, Subtitle C, Book V of the Revised Administrative Code — Vests the COMELEC Chairman with power to make temporary assignments and transfer personnel.