We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2
Repco he Piippines
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ANO LOCAL GOVERNMENT
DBLOANPOLCOM Gn EDGR rr ann Are, est Tange, OPN hy
i aggre
DIR JONATHAN PAUL M. LEUsENjR CILG OPINION NO. 42_ 5, 2018
Regional Director
DILG-Region IT
Regional Government Center, Carig Sur
Tuguegarao City, Cagayan
Dear RD Leusen, Jr:
This pertains to your letter dated 2 July 2018, seeking guidance from the Central
Office on the status of the newly elected barangay and/or Sangguniang Kabataan officials
under Contract of Service (COS) and/or Job Order (JO) workers who filed their certificates
of candidacy.
Pursuant to Section 4(a) of Commission on Elections (COMELEC) Resolution No.
8678', any person holding a public appointive office or position including active members
of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, and other officers and employees in government-
owned or controlled corporations, shall be considered ipso fécto resigned from his office
upon the filing of his certificate of candidacy.
Since COS/JOs are not appointive officials, this level is of the considered view that
the above-mentioned provision of the COMELEC Resolution is not applicable to them.
‘Thus, they are still entitled to their salaries for services rendered after filing of their
Certificate of Candidacy (COC).
However, on the assumption that they won and duly elected, we believe that
Section 8, Article IX(B) of the Philippine Constitution should be applied, to wit:
“Section 8. No elective or appointive public officer or employee shall
receive additional, double or indirect compensation, unless
specifically authorized by law, nor accept without the consent of the
Congress, any present, emolument, office, or title of any kind from
any foreign government.
' Entitled, "Guidelines on the filing of Cereilicate of Candidacy and Nomination of Official Candidates of
Registered Political Parties in Connection With the May 10, 2010 National and Local Elections” Pensions or gratuities shall not be considered as additional, double,
or indirect compensation.”
Although services rendered under Job Order contracts are not counted as
government services as there is no employer-employee relationship created between the
government and the job order employee, still, it is considered “working in the government”.
Hence, to allow job orders and contracts of services as exemption would be to indirectly
permit an act that is directly prohibited by the Constitution on double compensation. It
‘would be an interpretation that collides with che spirit and the intention of the prohibition
What is ditectly prohibited cannot be indirectly permitted. If such interpretation and
practice is tolerated, the prohibition can be so easily evaded, as if no qualified other persons
were available, therefore qualifying for a job order basis hiring’.
Lastly, the compensation received out of the contract is sourced from government
funds, thus, technically, receiving double compensation from the government which is
proscribed?,
We hope to have guided you on the matter.
Very truly yours,
By Authority of the Seretary,
q
Undersectetary
' Montero vs. Cloribel, CA-G:R. SP No, 154605, dated 28 June 2016
+ Field Investigation Office vs. Josephine H. Abalecio", docketed as OMB-V-A-17-0123
DILG LO No. 15 s2016 20% DF Cannot Be Utilized For Purchase of Ambulance and Other Motor Vehicles Unless Particularly Identified or Authorized Under Item 3.0 of The JMC
