Primary Holding

The transfer of Sta. Maria from his deanship to a Special Assistant role was a removal from office without due process, violating his constitutional right to security of tenure. The Court ordered his reinstatement as Dean.

Background

Sta. Maria was appointed Dean of the College of Education at UP for a five-year term. Due to student protests and demands for his resignation, UP President Salvador P. Lopez transferred him to a Special Assistant role. Sta. Maria argued this was a removal without cause or due process.

Facts

• 1. Sta. Maria was appointed Dean for a five-year term, effective May 16, 1967, to May 17, 1972.
• 2. Students demanded changes in academic policies and physical plant improvements.
• 3. Sta. Maria addressed some demands but was accused of inaction on others.
• 4. Students boycotted classes, demanding Sta. Maria’s resignation.
• 5. Lopez transferred Sta. Maria to a Special Assistant role, citing the need to restore order.
• 6. Sta. Maria challenged the transfer, arguing it was a removal without due process.

Arguments of the Petitioners

• 1. The transfer was a removal from office without cause or due process.
• 2. Sta. Maria had a fixed term as Dean and could not be removed without just cause.
• 3. The transfer was a demotion, as the Special Assistant role lacked the authority and prestige of a deanship.

Arguments of the Respondents

• 1. The transfer was not a removal but a reassignment in the interest of public service.
• 2. Sta. Maria retained his rank and salary, and the transfer was necessary to address the student boycott.
• 3. The transfer was an emergency measure to restore normalcy to the university.

Issues

• 1. Whether the transfer of Sta. Maria from his deanship to a Special Assistant role constituted a removal from office.
• 2. Whether the transfer violated Sta. Maria’s right to security of tenure.
• 3. Whether the transfer was justified as an emergency measure.

Ruling

• 1. The Court held that the transfer was effectively a removal from office, as it stripped Sta. Maria of his authority and responsibilities as Dean.
• 2. The transfer violated Sta. Maria’s right to security of tenure, as it was done without cause or due process.
• 3. The Court rejected the argument that the transfer was an emergency measure, stating that due process must still be observed even in times of crisis.
• 4. The Court ordered Sta. Maria’s reinstatement as Dean of the College of Education.

Doctrines

• 1. Security of Tenure: Public officers with fixed terms cannot be removed without cause and due process.
• 2. Due Process: Even in emergencies, due process must be observed before removing a public officer.
• 3. Transfer vs. Removal: A transfer that results in a demotion or loss of authority is considered a removal.

Key Excerpts

• 1. “Due process is associated with the sporting idea of fair play; it shuns oppression and eschews unfair dealing; it obeys the dictates of justice and is ruled by reason.”
• 2. “Peace secured at the expense of Constitutional principles is no peace at all.”

Precedents Cited

• 1. Lacson vs. Roque, 92 Phil. 456: Held that a transfer without consent is equivalent to removal.
• 2. Garcia vs. Lejano, L-12220: Emphasized that transfers must not violate security of tenure.
• 3. Borromeo vs. Mariano, 41 Phil. 323: Stated that a transfer resulting in a demotion is a removal.

Statutory and Constitutional Provisions

• 1. Article XII, Section 4, Constitution: No officer or employee in the Civil Service shall be removed or suspended except for cause as provided by law.
• 2. Section 32, Civil Service Act of 1959: No officer or employee shall be removed or suspended except for cause and after due process.