|
THE Supreme Court ruled that
holding two government offices at the same time is illegal and
unconstitutional.
This was after
the Court dismissed the motion for reconsideration of former
Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) chairman Magdangal
Elma for having two positions at the same time during the tenure of
then-President Joseph Estrada.
In a five-page
resolution of the SC 3rd Division, penned by Associate Justice
Minita Chico-Nazario, it dismissed the appeal of Elma and declared
that he held incompatible appointments as PCGG chairman and chief
presidential legal counsel (CPLC).
The Court
argued “the concurrent appointment to these offices is in
violation of Section 7, Paragraph 2, Article IX-B of the 1987
Constitution, since these are incompatible offices.”
“The duties
of the CPLC include giving independent and impartial advice on the
actions of the heads of various executive departments and agencies
and reviewing investigations involving heads of executive
departments. Since the actions of the PCGG chairman, head of an
executive agency, are subject to the review of the CPLC, such
appointments would be incompatible,” the ruling says.
It pointed out
that while Elma waived receiving remuneration for the second
appointment, the primary function of the PCGG chairman does not
require his appointment as CPLC.
The Court
said, “The basic issues that were raised have already been passed
upon. No substantial arguments were presented.”
The five-man
tribunal also junked the plea of Elma to elevate his case to the SC
en banc because “what is in question in the present case are the
constitutionality of respondent Elma’s concurrent appointments,
and not the constitutionality of any treaty, law, or agreement. The
mere application of constitutional provisions does not require the
case to be heard and decided en banc.”
Elma was
appointed chairman of the PCGG on October 30, 1998, and during his
tenure, he was appointed CPLC. He accepted the second appointment
but waived any salary for the second office.
This forced
the Public Interest Law Center to question the appointments of Elma
before the Court.
Besides
Justice Nazario, the resolution was concurred by Justices Consuelo
Ynares-Santiago and Alicia Austria-Martinez. Justice Romeo Callejo
was on leave, while Justice Antonio Eduardo Nachura inhibited from
the case, being the solicitor general who lodged a comment to the
Court involving the case.
 --Jomar
Canlas
|
