1) Executive Order 284 allowed Cabinet members, undersecretaries, and assistant secretaries to hold up to two additional government positions.
2) The Civil Liberties Union argued this was unconstitutional based on Section 13 of Article VII, which prohibits these officials from holding any other office during their tenure.
3) The Supreme Court ruled Executive Order 284 was null and void, as Section 13 imposes a stricter prohibition compared to other constitutional provisions, in order to prevent abuses of power.
1) Executive Order 284 allowed Cabinet members, undersecretaries, and assistant secretaries to hold up to two additional government positions.
2) The Civil Liberties Union argued this was unconstitutional based on Section 13 of Article VII, which prohibits these officials from holding any other office during their tenure.
3) The Supreme Court ruled Executive Order 284 was null and void, as Section 13 imposes a stricter prohibition compared to other constitutional provisions, in order to prevent abuses of power.
1) Executive Order 284 allowed Cabinet members, undersecretaries, and assistant secretaries to hold up to two additional government positions.
2) The Civil Liberties Union argued this was unconstitutional based on Section 13 of Article VII, which prohibits these officials from holding any other office during their tenure.
3) The Supreme Court ruled Executive Order 284 was null and void, as Section 13 imposes a stricter prohibition compared to other constitutional provisions, in order to prevent abuses of power.
Facts On July 25, 1987, President Cory Aquino issued Executive Order No. 284, the pertinent provisions of which are as follows: Sec. 1. Even if allowed by law or by the ordinary functions of his position, a member of the Cabinet, undersecretary or assistant secretary or other appointive officials of the Executive Department may, in addition to his primary position, hold not more than two positions in the government and government corporations and receive the corresponding compensation therefor; Provided, that this limitation shall not apply to ad hoc bodies or committees, or to boards, councils or bodies of which the President is the Chairman. Sec. 2. If a member of the cabinet, undersecretary or assistant secretary or other appointive official of the Executive Department holds more positions than what is allowed in Section 1 hereof, they (sic) must relinquish the excess position in favor of the subordinate official who is next in rank, but in no case shall any official hold more than two positions other than his primary position. Sec. 3. In order to fully protect the interest of the government in government-owned or controlled corporations, at least one-third (1/3) of the members of the boards of such corporation should either be a secretary, or undersecretary, or assistant secretary. Petitioner maintains that said Executive Order is unconstitutional, as it allows members of the Cabinet, their secretaries and undersecretaries to hold other government offices or positions in addition to their primary positions, which is contrary to what is in the Constitution, as provided for in Section 13, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution: 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. They shall not, during said tenure, directly or indirectly practice any other profession, participate in any business, or be financially interested in any contract with, or in any franchise, or special privilege granted by the Government or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries. They shall strictly avoid conflict of interest in the conduct of their office. Said Executive Order was promulgated on the basis of Secretary of Justice Sedfrey Ordonezs Opinion No. 73, Series of 1987, rendered on July 23, 1987, which construed Section 13, Article VII in relation to Section 7, par. (2), Article IX-B, declaring that Cabinet members, their deputies (undersecretaries) and assistant secretaries may hold other public office, including membership in the boards of government corporations: (a) when directly provided for in the Constitution as in the case of the Secretary of Justice who is made an ex officio member of the Judicial and Bar Council under Section 8, paragraph 1, Article VIII; or (b) if allowed by law, or (c) if allowed by the primary functions of their respective positions. Issue 1. Whether or not Executive Order No. 284 is unconstitutional Discussion The Court ruled in favor of the petitioners and declared Executive Order No. 284 as null and void, and accordingly set aside. Looking into the intent of the framers of the Constitution, it is clear that Section 7, par. (2), Article IX-B was enacted in order to prevent abuses, which was prevalent during the Marcos regime. And while this law already provides for a sufficient blanket prohibition against holding of multiple offices or employment in the government subsuming both elective and appointive public officials, the Constitutional Commission imposed even stricter limitations on the President, Vice President, members of the Cabinet and their deputies and assistants from holding any other office or employment during their tenure, as provided for in Sec. 13, Article VII. What is provided for in Section 13, Article VII, specifically the phrase unless otherwise provided in this Constitution cannot refer to the broad exceptions under Section 7, Article IX-B of the 1987 Constitution. To do so would render nugatory and meaningless the intent of the framers of the Constitution to impose a stricter prohibition on the President, Vice President, members of the Cabinet and their deputies and assistants from holding any other office or employment during their tenure.
Ruling WHEREFORE, subject to the qualification above-stated, the petitions are GRANTED. Executive Order No. 284 is hereby declared null and void and is accordingly set aside.