I. Title: Almario vs.
Executive secretary
II. Full Title: NATIONAL ARTIST FOR LITERATURE VIRGILIO ALMARIO, NATIONAL
ARTIST FOR LITERATURE BIENVENIDO LUMBERA, NATIONAL ARTIST FOR VISUAL
ARTS (PAINTING) BENEDICTO CABRERA, NATIONAL ARTIST FOR VISUAL ARTS
(SCULPTURE) NAPOLEON ABUEVA, NATIONAL ARTIST FOR VISUAL ARTS
(PAINTING AND SCULPTURE) ARTURO LUZ, NATIONAL ARTIST FOR PRODUCTION
DESIGN SALVADOR BERNAL, UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR EMERITUS GEMINO ABAD,
DEAN MARVIC M.V.F. LEONEN (UP COLLEGE OF LAW), DEAN DANILO SILVESTRE
(UP COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE), DEAN ROLAND TOLENTINO (UP COLLEGE OF
MASS COMMUNICATION), PROF. JOSE DALISAY, DR. ANTON JUAN, DR. ALEXANDER
CORTEZ, DR. JOSE NEIL GARCIA, DR. PEDRO JUN CRUZ REYES, PROF. JOSE
CLAUDIO GUERRERO, PROF. MICHAEL M. COROZA, PROF. GERARD LICO, PROF.
VERNE DE LA PENA, PROF. MARIAN ABUAN, PROF. THEODORE O. TE, DR.
CRISTINA PANTOJA-HIDALGO, PROF. JOSE WENDELL CAPILI, PROF. SIR ANRIAL
TIATCO, PROF. NICOLO DEL CASTILLO, PROF. HORACIO DUMANLIG, PROF.
DANTON REMOTO, PROF. PRISCELINA PATAJOLEGASTO, PROF. BELEN
CALINGACION, PROF. AMIEL Y. LEONARDIA, PROF. VIM NADERA, PROF. MARILYN
CANTA, PROF. CECILIA DELA PAZ, ROF. CHARLSON ONG, PROF. CLOD MARLON
YAMBAO, PROF. KENNETH JAMANDRE, PROF. JETHRO JOAQUIN, ATTY. F.D.
NICOLAS B. PICHAY, ATTY. ROSE BEATRIX ANGELES, MR. FERNANDO JOSEF, MS.
SUSAN S. LARA, MR. ALFRED YUSON, MS. JING PANGANIBAN MENDOZA, MR.
ROMULO BAQUIRAN, JR., MR. CARLJOE JAVIER, MS. REBECCA T. ANONUEVO, MR.
JP ANTHONY D. CUNADA, MS. LEAH NAVARRO, MR. MARK MEILLY, MR. VERGEL O.
SANTOS, MR. GIL OLEA MENDOZA, MR. EDGAR C. SAMAR, MS. CHRISTINE BELLEN,
MR. ANGELO R. LACUESTA, MS. ANNA MARIA KATIGBAKLA CUESTA, MR. LEX
LEDESMA, MS. KELLY PERIQUET, MS. CARLA PACIS, MR. J. ALBERT GAMBOA, MR.
CESAR EVANGELISTA BUENDIA, MR. PAOLO ALCAZAREN, MR. ALWYN C. JAVIER,
MR. RAYMOND MAGNO GARLITOS, MS. GANG BADOY, MR. LESLIE BOCOBO, MS.
FRANCES BRETANA, MS. JUDITH TORRES, MS. JANNETTE PINZON, MS. JUNE
POTICAR-DALISAY, MS. CAMILLE DE LA ROSA, MR. JAMES LADIORAY, MR. RENATO
CONSTANTINO, JR., and CONCERNED ARTISTS OF THE PHILIPPINES (CAP),
Petitioners, v. THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, THE SECRETARY OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT, THE CULTURAL CENTER OF THE
PHILIPPINES, THE NATIONAL COMMISSION ON CULTURE AND THE ARTS, MS.
CECILE GUIDOTE-ALVAREZ, MR. CARLO MAGNO JOSE CAPARAS,MR. JOSE
MORENO, MR. FRANCISCO MANOSA, AND ALL PERSONS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE,
ACTING UNDER THEIR INSTRUCTIONS, DIRECTION, CONTROL AND SUPERVISION
IN RELATION TO THE CONFERMENT OF THE ORDER OF THE NATIONAL ARTIST
AND THE RELEASE OF FUNDS IN RELATION TO THE CONFERMENT OF THE
HONORS AND PRIVILEGES OF THE ORDER OF NATIONAL ARTISTS ON
RESPONDENTS GUIDOTE-ALVAREZ, CAPARAS, MORENO AND MANOSA,
Respondents.
III. Topic: Presidency
IV. Statement of facts: On April 27, 1972, former President Ferdinand E. Marcos issued Proclamation
No. 1001and, upon recommendation of the Board of Trustees of the Cultural Center of the Philippines
(CCP), created the category of Award and Decoration of National Artist to be awarded to Filipinos who
have made distinct contributions to arts and letters. In the same issuance, Fernando Amorsolo was
declared as the first National Artist.
On April 3, 1992, Republic Act No. 7356, otherwise known as the Law Creating the National Commission
for Culture and the Arts, was signed into law. It established the National Commission for Culture and the
Arts (NCCA) and gave it an extensive mandate over the development, promotion and preservation of the
Filipino national culture and arts and the Filipino cultural heritage.
CCP Board of Trustees and the NCCA have been mandated by law to promote, develop and protect the
Philippine national culture and the arts, and authorized to give awards to deserving Filipino artists, the
two bodies decided to team up and jointly administer the National Artists Award.
On April 3, 2009, the First Deliberation Panel met. A total of 87 nominees were considered during the
deliberation and a preliminary shortlist of 32 names was compiled.
On April 23, 2009, the Second Deliberation Panel shortlisted 13 out of the 32 names in the preliminary
shortlist. On May 6, 2009, the final deliberation was conducted by the 30-member Final Deliberation
Panel comprised of the CCP Board of Trustees and the NCCA Board of Commissioners and the living
National Artists. From the 13 names in the second shortlist, a final list of four names was agreed upon
namely: Manuel Conde, Ramon Santos, Lazaro Francisco and Federico Aguilar-Alcuaz.
CCP and NCCA submitted this recommendation to the President. According to respondents, the
aforementioned letter was referred by the Office of the President to the Committee on Honors.
Meanwhile, the Office of the President allegedly received nominations from various sectors, cultural
groups and individuals strongly endorsing private respondents Cecile Guidote-Alvarez, Carlo Magno Jose
Caparas, Francisco Masa and Jose Moreno. The Committee on Honors purportedly processed these
nominations and invited resource persons to validate the qualifications and credentials of the nominees.
Acting on this recommendation, Proclamation No. 1823 declaring Manuel Conde a National Artist was
issued on June 30, 2009. Subsequently, on July 6, 2009, Proclamation Nos. 1824 to 1829 were issued
declaring Lazaro Francisco, Federico AguilarAlcuaz and private respondents Guidote-Alvarez, Caparas,
Masa and Moreno, respectively, as National Artists. This was subsequently announced to the public by
then Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita on July 29, 2009.
statement of the case:Convinced that, by law, it is the exclusive province of the NCCA Board of
Commissioners and the CCP Board of Trustees to select those who will be conferred the Order of
National Artists and to set the standard for entry into that select group, petitioners instituted this
petition for prohibition, certiorari and injunction (with prayer for restraining order) praying that the
Order of National Artists be conferred on Dr. Santos and that the conferment of the Order of National
Artists on respondents Guidote-Alvarez, Caparas, Masa and Moreno be enjoined and declared to have
been rendered in grave abuse of discretion.
All of the petitioners claim that former President Macapagal-Arroyo gravely abused her discretion in
disregarding the results of the rigorous screening and selection process for the Order of National Artists
and in substituting her own choice for those of the Deliberation Panels. According to petitioners, the
Presidents discretion to name National Artists is not absolute but limited. In particular, her discretion on
the matter cannot be exercised in the absence of or against the recommendation of the NCCA and the
CCP.
V. ISSUE: Whether or not there was grave abuse of discretion committed by former President Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo.
VI. HELD: Yes. The "power to recommend" includes the power to give "advice, exhortation or
indorsement, which is essentially persuasive in character, not binding upon the party to whom it is
made."
Thus, in the matter of the conferment of the Order of National Artists, the President may or may not
adopt the recommendation or advice of the NCCA and the CCP Boards. In other words, the advice of the
NCCA and the CCP is subject to the Presidents discretion.
Nevertheless, the Presidents discretion on the matter is not totally unfettered, nor the role of the NCCA
and the CCP Boards meaningless. The Presidents power must be exercised in accordance with existing
laws. Section 17, Article VII of the Constitution prescribes faithful execution of the laws by the President
The Presidents discretion in the conferment of the Order of National Artists should be exercised in
accordance with the duty to faithfully execute the relevant laws. The faithful execution clause is best
construed as an obligation imposed on the President, not a separate grant of power.
In this connection, the powers granted to the NCCA and the CCP Boards in connection with the
conferment of the Order of National Artists by executive issuances were institutionalized by two laws,
namely, Presidential Decree No. 208 dated June 7, 1973 and Republic Act No. 7356. In particular,
Proclamation No. 1144 dated May 15, 1973 constituted the CCP Board as the National Artists Awards
Committee and tasked it to "administer the conferment of the category of National Artist" upon
deserving Filipino artists with the mandate to "draft the rules to guide its deliberations in the choice of
National Artists".
By virtue of their respective statutory mandates in connection with the conferment of the National
Artist Award, the NCCA and the CCP decided to work together and jointly administer the National Artist
Award. They reviewed the guidelines for the nomination, selection and administration of the National
Artist Award. An administrative regulation adopted pursuant to law has the force and effect of law.
Thus, the rules, guidelines and policies regarding the Order of National Artists jointly issued by the CCP
Board of Trustees and the NCCA pursuant to their respective statutory mandates have the force and
effect of law. Until set aside, they are binding upon executive and administrative agencies,including the
President himself/herself as chief executor of laws.
In view of the various stages of deliberation in the selection process and as a consequence of his/her
duty to faithfully enforce the relevant laws, the discretion of the President in the matter of the Order of
National Artists is confined to the names submitted to him/her by the NCCA and the CCP Boards. This
means that the President could not have considered conferment of the Order of National Artists on any
person not considered and recommended by the NCCA and the CCP Boards. That is the proper import of
the provision of Executive Order No. 435, s. 2005, that the NCCA and the CCP "shall advise the President
on the conferment of the Order of National Artists." Applying this to the instant case, the former
President could not have properly considered respondents Guidote-Alvarez, Caparas, Masa and Moreno,
as their names were not recommended by the NCCA and the CCP Boards. Otherwise, not only will the
stringent selection and meticulous screening process be rendered futile, the respective mandates of the
NCCA and the CCP Board of Trustees under relevant laws to administer the conferment of Order of
National Artists, draft the rules and regulations to guide its deliberations, formulate and implement
policies and plans, and undertake any and all necessary measures in that regard will also become
meaningless.
VII. Dispositive Portion: Proclamation Nos. 1826 to 1829 dated July 6, 2009 proclaiming respondents
Cecile Guidote-Alvarez, Carlo Magno Jose Caparas, Francisco Masa, and Jose Moreno, respectively, as
National Artists are declared INVALID and SET ASIDE for having been issued with grave abuse of
discretion.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 DEANS CIRCLE
2016
1.
Whether the Creation of the Truth Commission of 2010s basis is the Presidents power of control.
2.
Whether the Creation of the Truth Commission of 2010s basis is the Presidents duty to faithfully
execute the laws under Section 17,Article VII.
3.
Whether the Truth Commission of 2010 is constitutional.
Ruling:
1.
NO. The creation of the PTC is not justified by the Presidents power of control. 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. Clearly, the power of control is
entirely different from the power to create public offices. The former is inherent in the Executive, while the
latter finds basis from either a valid delegation from Congress, or his inherent duty to faithfully execute the
laws. Further, there is no valid delegation from the congress that would warrant the creation of the
commission because P.D. 1416, as amended by P.D. No. 1772 where the respondent anchors its legality was
already held functus oficio. Thus, it begs the question of where does the Truth Commission of 2010 finds legal
basis? This is answered by the second issue herein.
2.
YES. While the power to create a truth commission cannot pass muster on the basis of P.D. No. 1416
as amended by P.D. No. 1772, the creation of the PTC finds justification under Section 17, Article VII of the
Constitution, imposing upon the President the duty to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed. The
Presidents power to conduct investigations to aid him in ensuring the faithful execution of laws in this case,
fundamental laws on public accountability and transparency is inherent in the Presidents powers as the Chief
Executive. That 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.Indeed, the Executive is given much leeway in ensuring that our laws are faithfully executed. The
powers of the President are not limited to those specific powers under the Constitution. One of the recognized
powers of the President granted pursuant to this constitutionally-mandated duty is the power to create ad
hoc committees. This flows from the obvious need to ascertain facts and determine if laws have been
faithfully executed.
On the charge that Executive Order No. 1 transgresses the power of Congress to appropriate funds
for the operation of a public office, suffice it to say that there will be no appropriation but only an allotment or
allocations of existing funds already appropriated.
3.
NO. It violates the equal protection clause. The intent to single out the previous administration is
plain, patent and manifest. In this regard, it must be borne in mind that the Arroyo administration is but just a
member of a class, that is, a class of past administrations. It is not a class of its own. Not to include past
administrations similarly situated constitutes arbitrariness which the equal protection clause cannot
sanction.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL ARTIST FOR LITERATURE VIRGILIO ALMARIO, ET. AL V. THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, ET.
AL
G.R. No. 189028, July 16, 2013, LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
The Presidents discretion in the conferment of the Order of National Artists should be exercised in
accordance with the duty to faithfully execute the relevant laws.
Facts:
After the Cultural Center of the Philippines and National Commission for Culture and the Arts
submitted the recommendation of final list of National Artists to the President, aforementioned letter was
93 | P a g e
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 DEANS CIRCLE
2016
referred by the Office of the President to the Committee on Honors. Meanwhile, the OP allegedly received
nominations from various sectors, cultural groups and individuals strongly endorsing Cecile Guidote-Alvarez,
et.al. The Committee on Honors purportedly processed these nominations and invited resource persons to
validate the qualifications and credentials of the nominees. Acting on this recommendation, Proclamation No.
1823 declaring Manuel Conde a National Artist was issued. Subsequently, Proclamation Nos. 1824 to 1829
were issued declaring Lazaro Francisco, Federico Aguilar Alcuaz and Guidote-Alvarez, Caparas, Masa and
Moreno, respectively, as National Artists. A petition for prohibition, certiorari and injunction was filed by
Virgilio Almario, et. al who claim that former President Macapagal-Arroyo gravely abused her discretion in
disregarding the results of the rigorous screening and selection process for the Order of National Artists and
in substituting her own choice for those of the Deliberation Panels. According to them, the Presidents
discretion to name National Artists is not absolute but limited. In particular, her discretion on the matter
cannot be exercised in the absence of or against the recommendation of the NCCA and the CCP.
Issue:
Whether there was grave abuse of discretion committed by former President Arroyo.
Ruling:
YES. The "power to recommend" includes the power to give "advice, exhortation or indorsement,
which is essentially persuasive in character, not binding upon the party to whom it is made."In view of the
various stages of deliberation in the selection process and as a consequence of his/her duty to faithfully
enforce the relevant laws, the discretion of the President in the matter of the Order of National Artists is
confined to the names submitted to him/her by the NCCA and the CCP Boards. This means that the President
could not have considered conferment of the Order of National Artists on any person not considered and
recommended by the NCCA and the CCP Boards. That is the proper import of the provision of Executive Order
No. 435, s. 2005, that the NCCA and the CCP "shall advise the President on the conferment of the Order of
National Artists." Applying this to the instant case, the former President could not have properly considered
respondents Guidote-Alvarez, Caparas, Masa and Moreno, as their names were not recommended by the
NCCA and the CCP Boards. Otherwise, not only will the stringent selection and meticulous screening process
be rendered futile, the respective mandates of the NCCA and the CCP Board of Trustees under relevant laws to
administer the conferment of Order of National Artists, draft the rules and regulations to guide its
deliberations, formulate and implement policies and plans, and undertake any and all necessary measures in
that regard will also become meaningless.
CESAR R. DE LEON V. J. ANTONIO M. CARPIO
G.R. No. 85243 October 12, 1989, CRUZ, J.
It is an elementary principle of our republican government, enshrined in the Constitution and honored
not in the breach but in the observance, that all executive departments, bureaus and offices are under the control
of the President of the Philippines.
Facts:
Francisco Estavillo and Cesar de Leon are two NBI agents terminated by then Minister of Justice
Neptali A. Gonzales. Upon appeal to the Review Committee, the said body declined to act on their petitions for
reconsideration on the ground that it had lost its jurisdiction with the ratification of the new Constitution.
They were advised instead to seek relief from the Civil Service Commission. The Merit Systems Protection
Board of CSC held that their dismissals were invalid and unconstitutional, having been done in violation of
their security of tenure under the 1987 Constitution. Accordingly, the Board ordered their reinstatement.
However, respondent Carpio, as Director of NBI, returned the orders issued by the Secretary of Justice to CSC
without action, claiming that they were null and void for having been rendered without jurisdiction.
94 | P a g e
G.R. No. 189028.July 16, 2013.*
NATIONAL ARTIST FOR LITERATURE VIRGILIO
ALMARIO, NATIONAL ARTIST FOR LITERATURE
BIENVENIDO LUMBERA, NATIONAL ARTIST FOR
VISUAL ARTS (PAINTING) BENEDICTO CABRERA,
NATIONAL ARTIST FOR VISUAL ARTS (SCULPTURE)
NAPOLEON ABUEVA, NATIONAL ARTIST FOR VISUAL
ARTS (PAINTING AND SCULPTURE) ARTURO LUZ,
NATIONAL ARTIST FOR PRODUCTION DESIGN
SALVADOR BERNAL, UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR
EMERITUS GEMINO ABAD, DEAN MARVIC M.V.F.
LEONEN (UP COLLEGE OF LAW), DEAN DANILO
SILVESTRE (UP COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE),
DEAN ROLAND TOLENTINO (UP COLLEGE OF MASS
COMMUNICATION), PROF. JOSE DALISAY, DR.
ANTON JUAN, DR. ALEXANDER CORTEZ, DR. JOSE
NEIL GARCIA, DR. PEDRO JUN CRUZ REYES, PROF.
JOSE CLAUDIO GUERRERO, PROF. MICHAEL M.
COROZA, PROF. GERARD LICO, PROF. VERNE DE LA
PENA, PROF. MARIAN ABUAN, PROF. THEODORE O.
TE, DR. CRISTINA PANTOJAHIDALGO, PROF. JOSE
_______________
* EN BANC.
270
270
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
National Artist for Literature Virgilio Almario, et al. vs.
The Executive Secretary
WENDELL CAPILI, PROF. SIR ANRIAL TIATCO, PROF.
NICOLO DEL CASTILLO, PROF. HORACIO DUMANLIG,
PROF. DANTON REMOTO, PROF. PRISCELINA
PATAJOLEGASTO, PROF. BELEN CALINGACION,
PROF. AMIEL Y. LEONARDIA, PROF. VIM NADERA,
PROF. MARILYN CANTA, PROF. CECILIA DELA PAZ,
PROF. CHARLSON ONG, PROF. CLOD MARLON
YAMBAO, PROF. KENNETH JAMANDRE, PROF.
JETHRO JOAQUIN, ATTY. F.D. NICOLAS B. PICHAY,
ATTY. ROSE BEATRIX ANGELES, MR. FERNANDO
JOSEF, MS. SUSAN S. LARA, MR. ALFRED YUSON, MS.
JING
PANGANIBANMENDOZA,
MR.
ROMULO
BAQUIRAN, JR., MR. CARLJOE JAVIER, MS. REBECCA
T. ANONUEVO, MR. JP ANTHONY D. CUNADA, MS.
LEAH NAVARRO, MR. MARK MEILLY, MR. VERGEL O.
SANTOS, MR. GIL OLEA MENDOZA, MR. EDGAR C.
SAMAR, MS. CHRISTINE BELLEN, MR. ANGELO R.
LACUESTA, MS. ANNA MARIA KATIGBAKLACUESTA,
MR. LEX LEDESMA, MS. KELLY PERIQUET, MS.
CARLA PACIS, MR. J. ALBERT GAMBOA, MR. CESAR
EVANGELISTA BUENDIA, MR. PAOLO ALCAZAREN,
MR. ALWYN C. JAVIER, MR. RAYMOND MAGNO
GARLITOS, MS. GANG BADOY, MR. LESLIE BOCOBO,
MS. FRANCES BRETANA, MS. JUDITH TORRES, MS.
JANNETTE PINZON, MS. JUNE POTICARDALISAY,
MS. CAMILLE DE LA ROSA, MR. JAMES LADIORAY,
MR. RENATO CONSTANTINO, JR., and CONCERNED
ARTISTS OF THE PHILIPPINES (CAP), petitioners, vs.
THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, THE SECRETARY OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT,
THE CULTURAL CENTER OF THE PHILIPPINES, THE
NATIONAL COMMISSION ON CULTURE AND THE
ARTS, MS. CECILE GUIDOTEALVAREZ, MR. CARLO
MAGNO JOSE CAPARAS,1 MR. JOSE MORENO, MR.
FRANCISCO MAOSA, AND ALL PERSONS, PUBLIC
AND PRIVATE, ACTING UNDER THEIR IN
_______________
1 Also referred to as Carlos Caparas and Carlo Caparas in some
parts or the records.
271
VOL. 701, JULY 16, 2013
271
National Artist for Literature Virgilio Almario, et al. vs.
The Executive Secretary
STRUCTIONS,
DIRECTION,
CONTROL
AND
SUPERVISION IN RELATION TO THE CONFERMENT
OF THE ORDER OF THE NATIONAL ARTIST AND THE
RELEASE OF FUNDS IN RELATION TO THE
CONFERMENT OF THE HONORS AND PRIVILEGES
OF THE ORDER OF NATIONAL ARTISTS ON
RESPONDENTS
GUIDOTEALVAREZ,
CAPARAS,
MORENO AND MAOSA, respondents.
Remedial Law Civil Procedure Parties The parties who
assail the constitutionality or legality of a statute or an official act
must have a direct and personal interest.The parties who assail
the constitutionality or legality of a statute or an official act must
have a direct and personal interest. They must show not only that
the law or any governmental act is invalid, but also that they
sustained or are in immediate danger of sustaining some direct
injury as a result of its enforcement, and not merely that they
suffer thereby in some indefinite way. They must show that they
have been or are about to be denied some right or privilege to
which they are lawfully entitled or that they are about to be
subjected to some burdens or penalties by reason of the statute or
act complained of.
Constitutional Law Equal Protection of the Law No real and
substantial distinction between respondents and petitioner Abad
has been shown that would justify deviating from the laws,
guidelines and established procedures, and placing respondents in
an exceptional position. The undue classification was not germane
to the purpose of the law. Instead, it contradicted the law and well
established guidelines, rules and regulations meant to carry the
law into effect.Among the other petitioners, Prof. Gemino Abad
presents a unique valid personal and substantial interest. Like
respondents Caparas, Maosa and Moreno, he was among the 87
nominees for the 2009 Order of National Artists. Like respondent
Moreno, he made it to the preliminary shortlist. As he did not
make it to the second shortlist, he was not considered by the Final
Deliberation Panel, more so by the former President. It should be
recalled too that respondent GuidoteAlvarez was disqualified to
be nominated for being the Executive Director of the NCCA at
that time while respondents Maosa and Caparas did not make it
to the preliminary shortlist and respondent Moreno was not
included in the second shortlist.
272
272
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
National Artist for Literature Virgilio Almario, et al. vs. The
Executive Secretary
Yet, the four of them were treated differently and considered
favorably when they were exempted from the rigorous screening
process of the NCCA and the CCP and conferred the Order of
National Artists. The Committee on Honors and the former
President effectively treated respondents GuidoteAlvarez,
Caparas, Maosa and Moreno as a preferred class. The special
treatment accorded to respondents GuidoteAlvarez, Caparas,
Maosa and Moreno fails to pass rational scrutiny. No real and
substantial distinction between respondents and petitioner Abad
has been shown that would justify deviating from the laws,
guidelines and established procedures, and placing respondents in
an exceptional position. The undue classification was not germane
to the purpose of the law. Instead, it contradicted the law and
wellestablished guidelines, rules and regulations meant to carry
the law into effect. While petitioner Abad cannot claim
entitlement to the Order of National Artists, he is entitled to be
given an equal opportunity to vie for that honor. In view of the
foregoing, there was a violation of petitioner Abads right to equal
protection, an interest that is substantial enough to confer him
standing in this case.
Remedial Law Civil Procedure Taxpayers Suit A taxpayers
suit is proper only when there is an exercise of the spending or
taxing power of the Congress.As regards the other concerned
artists and academics as well as the CAP, their claim of deep
concern for the preservation of the countrys rich cultural and
artistic heritage, while laudable, falls short of the injury in fact
requirement of standing. Their assertion constitutes a generalized
grievance shared in a substantially equal measure by all or a
large class of citizens. Nor can they take refuge in their status as
taxpayers as the case does not involve any illegal appropriation or
taxation. A taxpayers suit is proper only when there is an
exercise of the spending or taxing power of the Congress.
Same Prohibition Injunction It has been held that the
remedies of prohibition and injunction are preventive and, as such,
cannot be availed of to restrain an act that is already fait
accompli.The present action is a petition for prohibition,
certiorari, injunction, restraining order and all other legal, just
and equitable reliefs. It has been held that the remedies of
prohibition and injunction are preventive and, as such, cannot be
availed of to restrain an act that is already fait accompli. Where
the act sought to be prohibited or en
273
VOL. 701, JULY 16, 2013
273
National Artist for Literature Virgilio Almario, et al. vs. The
Executive Secretary
joined has already been accomplished or consummated,
prohibition or injunction becomes moot. Nevertheless, even if the
principal issue is already moot, this Court may still resolve its
merits for the future guidance of both bench and bar. Courts will
decide a question otherwise moot and academic if it is capable of
repetition, yet evading review.
Presidency Order of National Artists The Presidents
discretion in the conferment of the Order of National Artists
should be exercised in accordance with the duty to faithfully
execute the relevant laws.In the matter of the conferment of the
Order of National Artists, the President may or may not adopt the
recommendation or advice of the NCCA and the CCP Boards. In
other words, the advice of the NCCA and the CCP is subject to the
Presidents discretion. Nevertheless, the Presidents discretion on
the matter is not totally unfettered, nor the role of the NCCA and
the CCP Boards meaningless. Discretion is not a freespirited
stallion that runs and roams wherever it pleases but is reined in
to keep it from straying. In its classic formulation, discretion is
not unconfined and vagrant but canalized within banks that
keep it from overflowing. The Presidents power must be
exercised in accordance with existing laws. Section 17, Article VII
of the Constitution prescribes faithful execution of the laws by the
President: Sec. 17. The President shall have control of all the
executive departments, bureaus and offices. He shall ensure
that the laws be faithfully executed. (Emphasis supplied.)
The Presidents discretion in the conferment of the Order of
National Artists should be exercised in accordance with the duty
to faithfully execute the relevant laws. The faithful execution
clause is best construed as an obligation imposed on the
President, not a separate grant of power. It simply underscores
the rule of law and, corollarily, the cardinal principle that the
President is not above the laws but is obliged to obey and execute
them. This is precisely why the law provides that
[a]dministrative or executive acts, orders and regulations shall
be valid only when they are not contrary to the laws or the
Constitution.
Administrative Regulations Statutes An administrative
regulation adopted pursuant to law has the force and effect of law.
We have held that an administrative regulation adopted
pursuant to law has the force and effect of law. Thus, the rules,
guidelines and policies regarding the Order of National Artists
jointly issued by the
274
274
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
National Artist for Literature Virgilio Almario, et al. vs. The
Executive Secretary
CCP Board of Trustees and the NCCA pursuant to their
respective statutory mandates have the force and effect of law.
Until set aside, they are binding upon executive and
administrative agencies, including the President himself/herself
as chief executor of laws.
Presidency Order of National Artists In view of the various
stages of deliberation in the selection process and as a consequence
of his/her duty to faithfully enforce the relevant laws, the discretion
of the President in the matter of the Order of National Artists is
confined to the names submitted to him/her by the National
Commission for Culture and Arts (NCCA) and the Cultural Center
of the Philippines (CCP) Boards.In view of the various stages of
deliberation in the selection process and as a consequence of
his/her duty to faithfully enforce the relevant laws, the discretion
of the President in the matter of the Order of National Artists is
confined to the names submitted to him/her by the NCCA and the
CCP Boards. This means that the President could not have
considered conferment of the Order of National Artists on any
person not considered and recommended by the NCCA and the
CCP Boards. That is the proper import of the provision of
Executive Order No. 435, s. 2005, that the NCCA and the CCP
shall advise the President on the conferment of the Order of
National Artists. Applying this to the instant case, the former
President could not have properly considered respondents
GuidoteAlvarez, Caparas, Maosa and Moreno, as their names
were not recommended by the NCCA and the CCP Boards.
Otherwise, not only will the stringent selection and meticulous
screening process be rendered futile, the respective mandates of
the NCCA and the CCP Board of Trustees under relevant laws to
administer the conferment of Order of National Artists, draft the
rules and regulations to guide its deliberations, formulate and
implement policies and plans, and undertake any and all
necessary measures in that regard will also become meaningless.
Same Same Equal Protection of the Law There was a
violation of the equal protection clause of the Constitution when
the former President gave preferential treatment to respondents
GuidoteAlvarez, Caparas, Maosa and Moreno The conferment of
the Order of National Artists on said respondents was therefore
made with grave abuse of discretion and should be set aside.
There was a violation of the equal protection clause of the
Constitution when the former President gave preferential
treatment to respondents Guidote
275
VOL. 701, JULY 16, 2013
275
National Artist for Literature Virgilio Almario, et al. vs. The
Executive Secretary
Alvarez, Caparas, Maosa and Moreno. The former Presidents
constitutional duty to faithfully execute the laws and observe the
rules, guidelines and policies of the NCCA and the CCP as to the
selection of the nominees for conferment of the Order of National
Artists proscribed her from having a free and uninhibited hand in
the conferment of the said award. The manifest disregard of the
rules, guidelines and processes of the NCCA and the CCP was an
arbitrary act that unduly favored respondents GuidoteAlvarez,
Caparas, Maosa and Moreno. The conferment of the Order of
National Artists on said respondents was therefore made with
grave abuse of discretion and should be set aside.
SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION in the Supreme Court.
Certiorari.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
Mary Grace C. PanganibanMendoza for petitioners.
Kapunan, Lotilla, Garcia & Castillo Law Offices for
respondent.
The Government Corporate Counsel for respondent
Cultural Center of the Philippines.
M.M. Lazaro & Associates for private respondent Carlo
Magno Jose Caparas.
Verano Law Firm for respondent Francisco T. Maosa.
LEONARDODE CASTRO,J.:
Art has traditionally been viewed as the expression of
everything that is true, good and beautiful. As such, it is
perceived to evoke and produce a spirit of harmony. Art is
