Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 19 views

    Position, No Appointive Official Shall Hold Any Other Office or Employment in The

    Uploaded by

    Angelica Joyce Belen
    The Civil Liberties Union challenged an executive order allowing Cabinet members and their assistants to hold additional government positions, arguing it violated the Constitution which prohibits such dual roles unless authorized. The government argued another Constitutional section allowed other appointive officials to hold additional roles if permitted by law or their primary duties. The court ruled the intent was to impose a stricter prohibition on the President and Cabinet holding other offices or jobs unless expressly authorized in the Constitution, making the executive order unconstitutional.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Position, No Appointive Official Shall Hold Any Other Office or Employment in The

    Uploaded by

    Angelica Joyce Belen
    19 views2 pages
    The Civil Liberties Union challenged an executive order allowing Cabinet members and their assistants to hold additional government positions, arguing it violated the Constitution which prohibits such dual roles unless authorized. The government argued another Constitutional section allowed other appointive officials to hold additional roles if permitted by law or their primary duties. The court ruled the intent was to impose a stricter prohibition on the President and Cabinet holding other offices or jobs unless expressly authorized in the Constitution, making the executive order unconstitutional.

    Original Description:

    a

    Original Title

    11.-Consti

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    RTF, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Civil Liberties Union challenged an executive order allowing Cabinet members and their assistants to hold additional government positions, arguing it violated the Constitution which prohibits such dual roles unless authorized. The government argued another Constitutional section allowed other appointive officials to hold additional roles if permitted by law or their primary duties. The court ruled the intent was to impose a stricter prohibition on the President and Cabinet holding other offices or jobs unless expressly authorized in the Constitution, making the executive order unconstitutional.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as rtf, pdf, or txt
    19 views2 pages

    Position, No Appointive Official Shall Hold Any Other Office or Employment in The

    Uploaded by

    Angelica Joyce Belen
    The Civil Liberties Union challenged an executive order allowing Cabinet members and their assistants to hold additional government positions, arguing it violated the Constitution which prohibits such dual roles unless authorized. The government argued another Constitutional section allowed other appointive officials to hold additional roles if permitted by law or their primary duties. The court ruled the intent was to impose a stricter prohibition on the President and Cabinet holding other offices or jobs unless expressly authorized in the Constitution, making the executive order unconstitutional.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as rtf, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION vs.

    THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

    FACTS: These two (2) petitions both seek a declaration of the


    unconstitutionality of Executive Order No. 284 issued by President Corazon C.
    Aquino. Petitioners maintain that this EO which, in effect, allows members of
    the Cabinet, their undersecretaries and assistant secretaries to hold other
    government offices or positions in addition to their primary positions, albeit
    subject to the limitation therein imposed, runs counter to Section 13, Article
    VII of the 1987 Constitution, which provides as follows.

    "Sec. 13. The President, Vice-President, the Members of the Cabinet, and their
    deputies or assistants shall not, unless otherwise provided in this Constitution, hold
    any other office or employment during their tenure. xxx"

    On the other hand, the respondents based their contention on the provisions
    of Article IX-B, Section 7, par. (2) which provides:

    "Unless otherwise allowed by law or by the primary functions of his


    position, no appointive official shall hold any other office or employment in the
    government or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, including
    government-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries."

    Petitioners insist that because of the phrase "unless otherwise provided in


    this Constitution" used in Section 13 of Article VII, the exception must be
    expressly provided in the Constitution. Public respondents, on the other
    hand, maintain that the phrase "unless otherwise provided in the
    Constitution" in Section 13, Article VII makes reference to Section 7, par. (2),
    Article I-XB insofar as the appointive officials mentioned therein are
    concerned.

    ISSUE: Whether or not the prohibition in Section 13, Article VII of the 1987
    Constitution admit of the broad exceptions made for appointive officials in
    general under Section 7, par. (2), Article I-XB?

    RULING: NO. The intent of the framers of the Constitution was to impose a
    stricter prohibition on the President and his official family in so far as holding
    other offices or employment in the government or elsewhere is concerned.
    Thus, while all other appointive officials in the civil service are allowed to
    hold other office or employment in the government during their tenure when
    such is allowed by law or by the primary functions of their positions,
    members of the Cabinet, their deputies and assistants may do so only when
    expressly authorized by the Constitution itself. In other words, Section 7,
    Article I-XB is meant to lay down the general rule applicable to all elective
    and appointive public officials and employees, while Section 13, Article VII is
    meant to be the exception applicable only to the President, the Vice-
    President, Members of the Cabinet, their deputies and assistants.
    GRANTED. Executive Order No. 284 is hereby declared null and void.

    You might also like