Admin Chapter 5 by Carlo Cruz Lecture Notes PDF

Preview

Summary

Atty. Chris Bendijo A. 2020 - 2021CHAPTER 5THE QUASI-JUDICIAL POWERQuasi-Judicial Power  The power of the administrative agency to determine questions of fact to which the legislative policy is to apply, in accordance with the standards laid down by the law itself.  Exercised o When the administra...

Description

Administrative Law Atty. Chris Bendijo

Derramas | BEDA LAW A.Y. 2020 - 2021

CHAPTER 5 THE QUASI-JUDICIAL POWER Quasi-Judicial Power  The power of the administrative agency to determine questions of fact to which the legislative policy is to apply, in accordance with the standards laid down by the law itself.  Exercised o When the administrative body performs in a judicial manner an act which is essentially of an executive or administrative nature o Where the power to act is incidental to, or reasonably necessary for, the performance of the executive or administrative duty entrusted to it.  Valid delegation o Where the legislature authorizes it to resolve factual questions in certain controversies in order to give effect to the mandate and policy of the law it is supposed to enforce.  Administrative Code of 1987 definition o An agency process for the formulation of final order  Proper exercise of QJ power requires compliance with the conditions: a. Jurisdiction must be properly acquired by the admin body b. Due process must be observed in the conduct of proceedings  Quasi-Judicial function o Term applied to the action, discretion of officers who are required to investigate facts or ascertain the existence of facts, hold hearings and draw conclusions from them as a basis for their official action, and to exercise discretion of a judicial nature. o Ex: Action of agency in denying/suspending/revoking a license, permit, franchise or certificate of public convenience and necessity  Not purely administrative but QJ or adjudicatory  Ratio: Dependent upon ascertainment of facts by the administrative agency, upon which the decision is to be made and rights and liabilities determined o QJ agency performs adjudicatory functions such that its awards determine the rights of parties and their decisions have the same effect as judgements of a court  Extent of power o Quantum of QJ which an administrative agency may exercise is defined in the enabling act of such agency o Depends on the provisions of the statute creating or empowering such agency. (Antipolo Realty Corp. v. The National Housing Authority) o Not implied: Grant of original jurisdiction on a QJ agency  Legislative grant of adjudicatory powers upon agencies is in the nature of limited and special jurisdiction, that is, authority to hear and determine a class of cases within its competence and field of expertise  Legislature did not intent to create a regular court of justice out of DARAB, equipped with powers inherent in the exercise of its jurisdiction  DARAB – only a QJ body whose limited jurisdiction does NOT include authority over petitions of certiorari, in the absence of express grant in R.A. No. 6657 o

Preliminary investigation (PI) is NOT a QJ proceeding (or when DOJ review the former’s order or resolutions)  Prosecutor in a PI does not determine the guilt or innocence of the accused  Does not exercise adjudication or nor rule-making functions  PI merely inquisitorial and is often the only means of discovering the persons who may be reasonably charged with a crime and to enable the fiscal to prepare his complaint/information  Not the trial of the case on the merits  Purpose: Determine whether a crime has been committed and whether there is probable cause to believe that the accused is guilty thereof

Source: Philippine Administrative Law by Carlo Cruz

Administrative Law Atty. Chris Bendijo

Derramas | BEDA LAW A.Y. 2020 - 2021

While fiscal makes that determination, he cannot be said to be acting as a quasi-court; for its courts that pass judgement on the accused, not the fiscal  ALTHOUGH some cases describe the prosecutor’s power to conduct PI as QJ in nature  True only to the extent that like QJ bodies, the prosecutor is an officer of the executive department exercising powers akin to those of a court o BSP Monetary Board is a QJ body exercising QJ functions  Independent central authority and a body corporate with its fiscal and administrative autonomy, mandated to provide policy directions in the areas of money, banking and credit  Has the power to issue subpoena, to sue for contempt those refusing to obey the subpoena without justifiable reason, to impose fines and other sanctions and to issue cease and desist order  Sec. 37 of R.A. No. 7653: to exercise its discretion in determining whether administrative sanctions should be imposed on banks  Which necessarily implies that the Monetary Board must conduct some form of investigation or hearing regarding the same Quasi-Judicial power v. Administrative Prerogative (Ph Veterans Bank v. CA) o Admin: Primary jurisdiction to determine and adjudicate agrarian reform matters  Ex: determine in a preliminary manner the just compensation for the lands taken under the agrarian reform program; determination subject to challenge before courts o QJ: Exclusive original jurisdiction over all matters involving the implementation of agrarian reform  Which includes the determination of questions of just compensation and original and exclusive jurisdiction of RTC over all petitions for the determination of just compensation  Ex: resolution of just compensation cases for the taking of land o Sec. 15 of Bill of Rights  Right to speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial, QJ or administrative bodies  Not limited to criminal proceedings but extends to all parties in civil and admin cases; and in all proceedings including judicial and QJ hearings  Hence, any party to a case may demand expeditious action on all officials who are tasked with administration of justice. (Lopez v. Office of the Ombudsman) o Administrative Bodies  Not considered courts; neither part of the judicial system nor are they deemed judicial tribunals  Doctrine of separation of powers  Reposes 3 great powers into its 3 branches; each being co-equal and coordinate and supreme in its own sphere.  Executive department – may not impose the judgement of one of its agencies upon the judiciary  Expanded jurisdiction of SC: empowered to determine WON there has been grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack/excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the government 



A. Jurisdiction  Competence of an office or body to act on a given matter or decide a certain question.  Without jurisdiction, the determinations made by the administrative bodies are null and without legal effect. Such acts are subject to direct and even collateral attack and may be assailed at any time since they are regarded as invalid ab initio.  May be conferred by the Constitution

Source: Philippine Administrative Law by Carlo Cruz

Administrative Law Atty. Chris Bendijo

Derramas | BEDA LAW A.Y. 2020 - 2021

Civil Service Commission Acknowledged as possessing authority over all employees of all branches, subdivisions, instrumentalities and agencies of the Government, including GOCC with original charter. o Commission on Elections Possessing exclusive original jurisdiction over all contests relating to the elections, returns and qualifications of all elective regional, provincial and city officials; and appellate jurisdiction over all contests involving elective municipal officials decided by trial courts of general jurisdiction, or involving elective barangay officials decided by trial courts of limited jurisdiction. o Commission on Audit Have the power, authority and duty to examine, audit and settle all accounts pertaining to the revenue and receipts of, and expenditures or uses of funds and property owned or held in trust by the Government or any of its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities including GOCC with original charters o Commission on Human Rights Have the following powers and functions: 1. Investigate, on its own or on complaint by any party, all forms of human rights violations involving civil and political rights 2. Adopt its operational guidelines and rules of procedure, and cite for contempt for violations thereof in accordance with the ROC Legislature has the power to confer jurisdiction upon the administrative body and so limit or expand its authority. o No uniform rule concerning the jurisdiction of administrative bodies that one might rely on as in the courts of justice. Administrative body has its own peculiar jurisdiction as conferred upon it by the specific provisions of its charter. o Such charters are not uniform or standard and may vary considerably as the discretion of the lawmaking body may dictate. o Some administrative bodies, over which regular courts of justice have no jurisdiction with respect to certain matters, as provided in said administrative bodies’ enabling statutes.  PCGG v. Peña RTC and CA have no jurisdiction over the Presidential Commission on Good Government in the exercise of its powers under the applicable E.O. and Art. XVIII, Sec. 26 of the Constitution. Therefore, may not interfere with and restrain or set aside orders and actions of the Commission. In the exercise of QJ functions, the Commission is a co-equal body with the RTC and co-equal bodies have no power to control the other  Sabio v. Gordon SC rejected the claim of the petitioners that they were exempted from appearing before a legislative inquiry on the basis of Sec. 4b of E.O. No. 1: o





No member or staff of the Commission shall be required to testify or produce evidence in any judicial legislative or administrative proceeding concerning matters within its official cognizance.

Court declared: Section 4b directly repugnant with Art. VI, Sec. 21: The Senate or the House of Representatives or any of its respective committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly published rules of procedure. The rights of persons appearing in or affected by such inquiries shall be respected.

Section 4b exempts PCGG members and staff from the Congress’ power of inquiry. This cannot be countenanced. Nowhere in the Constitution is any provision granting such exemption. The Congress’ power of inquiry, being broad, encompasses everything that concerns the administration of existing laws as well as proposed statutes. It even stands to government agencies created by Congress and officers whose positions are within the power of Congress to regulate or even abolish. PCGG belongs to this class.

Source: Philippine Administrative Law by Carlo Cruz

Administrative Law Atty. Chris Bendijo

Derramas | BEDA LAW A.Y. 2020 - 2021



Cariño v. CHR SC declares that CHR have no adjudicatory power; and it was not meant by the fundamental law to be another court. The most that may be conceded to the CHR in the way of adjudicative power is that it may investigate, i.e., receive evidence and make findings of fact as regards claimed HR violations involving civil and political rights. But fact-finding is NOT adjudication and cannot be likened to the judicial function of a court of justice, or even a QJ agency. The function of receiving evidence and ascertaining therefrom the facts of a controversy is not a judicial function, properly speaking. To be considered such, the faculty of receiving evidence and making factual conclusions in a controversy must be accompanied by the authority of applying the law to those factual conclusions to the end that the controversy may be decided or determined authoritatively, finally and definitively, subject to such appeals or modes of review as may be provided by law. This function, to repeat, the Commission does not have.

 A1. Rules of Procedure  Where an administrative body is expressly granted the power of adjudication, it is deemed also vested with the implied power to prescribe the rules to be observed in the conduct of its proceedings.  Angara v. Electoral Commission SC upheld the rules of proceedings adopted by the Electoral Commission in election contests of which it was the sole judge under the provisions of the Commonwealth Constitution. Rules of proceedings were justified under the doctrine of implication. “It is a settled rule of construction that where a general power is conferred or duty enjoined, every particular power necessary for the exercise of the one or the performance of the other is also conferred. In the absence of any further constitutional provision relating to the procedure to be followed in filing protests before the Electoral Commission, therefore, the incidental power to promulgate such rules necessary for the proper exercise of its exclusive power to judge all contests relating to the election, returns and qualifications of members of the National Assembly, must be deemed by necessary implication to have been lodged also in the Electoral Commission.”  Where the statute does not require any particular method of procedure to be followed by an administrative agency, the agency may adopt any reasonable method to carry out its functions. (Provident Tree Farms, Inc. v. Batario, Jr.)  The 1987 Constitution provides that each of the Constitutional Commissions o Article IX-A, Sec. 6 “en banc may promulgate its own rules regarding pleadings and practice before it or any of its offices. Such rules, however, shall not diminish, increase or modify substantive rights.” o Article VIII, Sec. 5(5) “rules of procedure of special courts and QJ bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the SC”  To be valid, the rules must not violate fundamental rights or encroach upon constitutional prerogatives, like the rule-making power of the SC. o Ph Lawyers Association v. Agrava “The Supreme Court has the exclusive and constitutional power with respect to admission to the practice of law in the Philippines 1 and to any member of the Philippine Bar in good standing may practice law anywhere and before any entity, whether judicial or quasi-judicial or administrative, in the Philippines” “Were we to allow the Patent Office, in the absence of an express and clear provision of law giving the necessary sanction, to require lawyers to submit to and pass on examination prescribed by it before they are allowed to practice before said Patent Office, then there would be no reason why other bureaus specially the Bureau of Internal Revenue and Customs, where the business in the same area are more or less complicated, such as the presentation of books of

Source: Philippine Administrative Law by Carlo Cruz

Administrative Law Atty. Chris Bendijo

Derramas | BEDA LAW A.Y. 2020 - 2021

accounts, balance sheets, etc., assessments exemptions, depreciation, these as regards the Bureau of Internal Revenue, and the classification of goods, imposition of customs duties, seizures, confiscation, etc., as regards the Bureau of Customs, may not also require that any lawyer practising before them or otherwise transacting business with them on behalf of clients, shall first pass an examination to qualify.”

o

o

o

Fermin v. COMELEC Rule 25 and COMELEC Resolution cannot supersede the dissimilar requirements of the law for filing a petition for disqualification and petition for denial of due course to or cancellation of CoC under the OEC. Agusin Promotional Enterprises, Inc. v. CA Administrative rules of procedure are not strictly enforced in administrative disputes. It should be construed liberally in order to promote their object and to assist the parties in obtaining a just, speedy and inexpensive determination of their respective claims and defenses. There was no denial of due process if the decision was rendered on the evidence presented at the hearing, or at least contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected. Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB) v. Lubrica SC explained that the power of admin agencies to promulgate rules of procedure does not or cannot be construed as allowing it to “grant itself jurisdiction ordinarily conferred only by the Constitution or by the law. Procedure Means by which the power or authority of a court to hear and decide a class of cases is put into action. Rules of procedure are remedial in nature and not substantive. They cover only rules on proceedings and practice.

A2. The Subpoena Power  The power to issue subpoena and subpoena duces tecum is not inherent in administrative bodies  These bodies may summon witnesses and require the production of evidence only when duly allowed by law, and always in connection with the matter they are authorized to investigate.  This power may be expressly granted in the charter of the administrative body (NLRC, CSC)  Section 13, Chapter 3 of Book VII of Administrative Code

Section 13. Subpoena. - In any contested case, the agency shall have the power to require the attendance of witnesses or the production of books, papers, documents and other pertinent data, upon request of any party before or during the hearing upon showing of general relevance. Unless otherwise provided by law, the agency may, in case of disobedience, invoke the aid of the Regional Trial Court within whose jurisdiction the contested case being heard falls. The Court may punish contumacy or refusal as contempt.



Authority to conduct investigation does not necessarily mean it can also summon witnesses and take testimony in the absence of a clear grant of this power from the legislature. o Carmelo v. Ramos Where an administrative body was authorized to investigate certain anomalies in the issuance of licenses in the City of Manila, but only by an executive order of the mayor and without any specific conferment of the power to summon witnesses and take testimony from them. o Cariño v. CHR: To investigate is not to adjudicate. "Investigate," means to examine, explore, inquire or delve or probe into, research on, study. The dictionary definition of "investigate" is "to observe or study closely: inquire into systematically. "to search or inquire into: x x to subject to an official probe x x : to conduct an official inquiry." The purpose of investigation, of course, is to discover, to find out, to learn, obtain information. Nowhere included or intimated is the notion of settling, deciding or resolving a controversy involved in the facts inquired into by application of the law to the facts established by the inquiry. The legal meaning of "investigate" is essentially the same: "to follow up step by step by patient inquiry or observation. To trace or track; to search into; to examine and inquire into with care and accuracy; to find out by careful inquisition; examination; the taking of evidence; a legal inquiry;" "to inquire; to make an investigation," "investigation" being in turn describe as "an administrative function, the exercise of which ordinarily does not require a hearing . x x an

Source: Philippine Administrative Law by Carlo Cruz

Administrative Law Atty. Chris Bendijo

Derramas | BEDA LAW A.Y. 2020 - 2021

inquiry, judicial or otherwise, for the discovery and collection of facts concerning a certain matter or matters." "Adjudicate," means to adjudge, arbitrate, judge, decide, determine, resolve, rule on, settle. The dictionary defines the term as "to settle finally (the rights and duties of the parties to a court case) on the merits of issues raised: x x to pass judgment on: settle judicially: x x act as judge." And "adjudge" means "to decide or rule upon as a judge or with judicial or quasi-judicial powers: x x to award or grant judicially in a case of controversy x x" In the legal sense, "adjudicate" means: "To settle in the exercise of judicial authority. To determine finally. Synonymous with adjudge in its strictest sense;" and "adjudge" means: "To pass on judicially, to decide, settle or decree, or to sentence or condemn, x x Implies a judicial determination of a fact, and the entry of a judgment."

o

o

Pascual v. Board of Medical Examiners Respondent in an administrative case may invoke his constitutional right against selfincrimination. At stake in this case was the party’s privilege to continue practicing medicine. SC held that the proceedings par...