Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 20 views

    Sarmiento III v. Mison - Digest

    Uploaded by

    Lorenzo Perater Elegio III
    This case concerns the appointment of Salvador Mison as Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs without confirmation by the Commission on Appointments. Petitioners argue this appointment is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court held that the appointment was constitutional based on provisions in the 1987 Constitution. It established four categories of appointments, requiring confirmation only for the first group involving heads of departments and other high-level positions. The position of Bureau Director is quite low, so confirmation is not required to avoid political influence. Therefore, the President's appointment of Mison as Customs Commissioner without CA confirmation was held to be valid.

    Copyright:

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

    Sarmiento III v. Mison - Digest

    Uploaded by

    Lorenzo Perater Elegio III
    20 views2 pages
    This case concerns the appointment of Salvador Mison as Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs without confirmation by the Commission on Appointments. Petitioners argue this appointment is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court held that the appointment was constitutional based on provisions in the 1987 Constitution. It established four categories of appointments, requiring confirmation only for the first group involving heads of departments and other high-level positions. The position of Bureau Director is quite low, so confirmation is not required to avoid political influence. Therefore, the President's appointment of Mison as Customs Commissioner without CA confirmation was held to be valid.

    Original Description:

    Political Law

    Original Title

    Sarmiento III v. Mison_digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case concerns the appointment of Salvador Mison as Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs without confirmation by the Commission on Appointments. Petitioners argue this appointment is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court held that the appointment was constitutional based on provisions in the 1987 Constitution. It established four categories of appointments, requiring confirmation only for the first group involving heads of departments and other high-level positions. The position of Bureau Director is quite low, so confirmation is not required to avoid political influence. Therefore, the President's appointment of Mison as Customs Commissioner without CA confirmation was held to be valid.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    20 views2 pages

    Sarmiento III v. Mison - Digest

    Uploaded by

    Lorenzo Perater Elegio III
    This case concerns the appointment of Salvador Mison as Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs without confirmation by the Commission on Appointments. Petitioners argue this appointment is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court held that the appointment was constitutional based on provisions in the 1987 Constitution. It established four categories of appointments, requiring confirmation only for the first group involving heads of departments and other high-level positions. The position of Bureau Director is quite low, so confirmation is not required to avoid political influence. Therefore, the President's appointment of Mison as Customs Commissioner without CA confirmation was held to be valid.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    Sarmiento III vs.

    Mison

    GR No. L-79974. December 17, 1987

    Ulpiano Sarmiento III and Juanito Arcilla, vs. Salvador Mison, in his capacity as Commissioner of the Bureau
    of Customs, and Guillermo Carague, in his capacity as Secretary of the Department of Budget

    Facts:
    Petitioners seek to enjoin Mison from performing the functions as Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs
    and Carague, as Budget Secretary, from disbursing payments for Mison’s salaries and emoluments on the
    ground that Mison’s appointment as Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs is unconstitutional by reason
    of its not having been confirmed by the Commission on Appointments (CA). On the other hand, respondents
    maintain the constitutionality of Mison’s appointment without the confirmation of the CA. It is apparent in
    Sec 16, Art. 7 of the Constitution that there are four groups of officers whom the president shall appoint.

    Issue: WON the appointment of Mison is unconstitutional.

    Held:
    No.
    The 1935 Constitution requires confirmation by the CA of all presidential appointments. This has
    resulted in “horse-trading” and similar malpractices.cUnder the 1973 Constitution, the president has the
    absolute power of appointment with hardly any check on the legislature.
    Given these two extremes, the 1987 Constitution struck a “middle-ground” by requiring the
    consent of the CA for the 1st group of appointments and leaving to the President without such confirmation
    the appointments of the other officers:

    1st group: Heads of the executive departments, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, officers
    of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain, and other officers whose appointments are
    vested in him in the Constitution,
    Specifically:
    *Regular members of the Judicial and Bar Council [Art. VIII, Sec. 8(2)]
    *Chairman and Commissioners of the Civil Service Commission [Art. IX-C, Sec. 1 (2)];
    *Chairman and Commissioners of the COA [Art. IX-D, Sec. 1 (2)];
    *Members of the regional consultative commission (Art. X, Sec. 18.)

    The rest of the appointments mentioned in sec. 16 are not subject to confirmation:

    2nd group: All other officers of the Government whose appointments are not otherwise provided for by law;

    3rd group: Those whom the President may be authorized by law to appoint; and

    4th group: Officers lower in rank whose appointments the Congress may by law vest in the President alone.

    Reason:
    1. Position of bureau director is quite low
    2. Confirmation of head of bureau would lead to political influence
    The clear and expressed intent of the framers of the 1987 Constitution is to exclude
    presidential appointments from confirmation on the CA except appointments to offices expressly
    mentioned in the first sentence of Sec. 16, Art VII. Therefore, the confirmation on the appointment of
    Commissioners of the Bureau of Customs by the CA is not required.

    The appointment of Mison without submitting his nomination the CA is within the constitutional authority
    of the President.

    You might also like