TOPIC: REORGANIZATION

Biraogo vs. Truth Commission,

GR No. 192935 –193036, December 7, 2010
DOCTRINE:
Reorganization involves the reduction of personnel, consolidation of offices, or abolition thereof by
reason of economy or redundancy of functions. It takes place when there is an alteration of the
existing structure of government offices or units therein, including the lines of control, authority, and
responsibility between them

To reorganize presupposes that an office is or offices are already existing and that:
(1) a reduction is effected, either of staff or of its functions, for transfer to another or for abolition
because of redundancy;
(2) offices are merged resulting in the retention of one as the dominant office;
(3) two offices are abolished resulting in the emergence of a new office carrying the attributes of its
predecessors as well as their responsibilities; or
(4) a new office is created by dividing the functions and staff of an existing office.

Facts:
This case involves two consolidated cases, both assails the constitutionality of Executive Order No. 1,
which created the "Philippine Truth Commission of 2010" (PTC).

President Benigno Simeon Aquino III, on July 30, 2010, signed EO No. 1 establishing the Philippine
Truth Commission of 2010 (Truth Commission).

PTC is a fact-finding body, and is an ad hoc body created under the Office of the President the primary
task of which is to investigate reports of graft and corruption committed by third-level public officers and
employees and agents during the previous administration.

It is vested with the investigative bodies under Section 37, Chapter 9, Book 1 of the Administrative Code
but it is not quasi-judicial body as it cannot adjudicate, arbitrate, resolve, settle, or render awards in
disputes between contending parties. It may issue subpoenas but it cannot cite people in contempt, much
less or order their arrest.

In the first case, Petitioners Louis Biraogo, in his capacity as a citizen and taxpayer, argues that:
 the executive order violates the legislative power of Congress as it usurps the authority to create
a public office and appropriate funds.
 PTC is a public office and not merely an adjunct body of the Office of the President. Thus, in
order that the President may create a public office he must be empowered by the Constitution, a
statute or an authorization vested in him by law.
 According to petitioner, such power cannot be presumed since there is no provision in the
Constitution or any specific law that authorizes the President to create a truth commission.
 He adds that Section 31 of the Administrative Code of 1987, granting the President the
continuing authority to reorganize his office, cannot serve as basis for the creation of a truth
commission considering the aforesaid provision merely uses verbs such as "reorganize,"
"transfer," "consolidate," "merge," and "abolish." It does not include the power to create a truth
commission.
The second case, filed by petitioners Edcel C. Lagman, Rodolfo B. Albano Jr., Simeon A. Datumanong,
and Orlando B. Fua Sr., argues that the executive order
 violates the separation of powers and encroaches on the powers of Congress and the
Ombudsman.
  the creation of a public office lies within the province of Congress and not with the executive
branch of government.

The OSG, on the other hand, argues that:

 the President has the inherent authority to create fact-finding bodies to assist in the performance
of his constitutional and administrative functions.
 concludes that the power of control necessarily includes the power to create offices; the President
may create the PTC in order to, among others, put a closure to the reported large scale graft and
corruption in the government
 he power to create a truth commission pursuant to the above provision finds statutory basis under
P.D. 1416, as amended by P.D. No. 1772.
o The said law granted the President the continuing authority to reorganize the national
government, including the power to group, consolidate bureaus and agencies, to abolish
offices, to transfer functions, to create and classify functions, services and activities,
transfer appropriations, and to standardize salaries and materials.

ISSUE:
1. Whether or not the creation of the PTC falls within the ambit of the power to reorganize as
expressed in Section 31 of the Revised Administrative Code
2. DOES THE CREATION OF AN OFFICE FALL WITHIN THE PRESIDENT’S POWER OF
CONTROL?
3. WON President merely exercise his continuing authority to reorganize the executive department?
4. Whether or not EO no. 1 is constitutional

RULING:
1. NO. The creation of the PTC does not fall within the power to reorganize as stated in Section 31 of the
Revised Administrative Code. The provision on reorganization contemplates the restructuring of existing
offices, not the creation of new ones.
Sec. 31 of Administrative Code states that "the President, subject to the policy in the Executive Office
and in order to achieve simplicity, economy and efficiency, shall have the continuing authority to
reorganize the administrative structure of the Office of the President.”
Section 31 shows that it is a very potent presidential power, as it empowers him to: (1) to re-organize his
own internal office; (2) transfer any function or office from the Office of the President to the various
executive departments; and (3) transfer any function or office from the various executive departments to
the Office of the President.
Reorganization involves the reduction of personnel, consolidation of offices, or abolition thereof by
reason of economy or redundancy of functions. It takes place when there is an alteration of the existing
structure of government offices or units therein, including the lines of control, authority, and
responsibility between them
To reorganize presupposes that an office is or offices are already existing and that:
(1) a reduction is effected, either of staff or of its functions, for transfer to another or for abolition because
of redundancy;
(2) offices are merged resulting in the retention of one as the dominant office;
(3) two offices are abolished resulting in the emergence of a new office carrying the attributes of its
predecessors as well as their responsibilities; or
(4) a new office is created by dividing the functions and staff of an existing office.
Clearly, the creation of the PTC does not fall within the power to reorganize as stated in the Revised
Administrative Code. The provision on reorganization contemplates the restructuring of existing offices,
not the creation of new ones.

2. NO. The court also rejects the argument that the President's power of control includes the power to
create offices.
Control is essentially the power to alter or modify or nullify or set aside what a subordinate officer had
done in the performance of his duties and to substitute the judgment of the former with that of the latter.
While power of control is inherent in the executive function, it is different from the power to create
public offices, which must be based on a valid delegation from Congress or the President's inherent duty
to faithfully execute the laws.

3. NO. Considering that the President was exercising a delegated power, his actions should have
conformed to the standards set by the law, that is, that the reorganization be in the interest of "simplicity,
economy, and efficiency’ as provided in Section 31 of Revised Administrative Code.
However, in this case, E.O. No.1 failed to meet the above cited requirements. In fact, the Truth
Commission clearly duplicates and supplants the functions and powers of the Office of the Ombudsman
and/or the Department of Justice. Such a creation becomes even more questionable considering that the
1987 Constitution itself mandates the Ombudsman to investigate graft and corruption cases.
Nevertheless, the court recognizes the President's inherent power to conduct investigations to aid in the
faithful execution of laws. Section 17, Article VII of the Constitution imposes upon the President the duty
to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed.
In this case, fundamental laws on public accountability and transparency — is inherent in the President’s
powers as the Chief Executive. The authority of the President to conduct investigations and to create
bodies to execute this power is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution or in statutes does not mean
that he is bereft of such authority. (faithful execution clause)
The purpose of allowing such bodies is to ascertain facts and determine if laws have been faithfully
executed.