ADMIN - MIDTERMS MANNER OF CREATION EXAMPLES

CONSTI PROISIONS Constitutional Commissions – Art 9,

1st LECTURE (maybe self-executing) 1987 Consti

BASIC CONCEPTS Ombudsman – Art 9, sec 5, 1987 Consti

Admin Agency
Admin agency
(Admin code of 1987)
COVERAGE
4th BRANCH of the GOVT
TYPES of ADMIN BODIES – P.R.O.C.I.P.
1. Performing business service for the
public
2. Regulating business affected w public Insurance Commission, LTFRB, ERB,
interest
3. Offering grant, gratuity, special
privilege
4. Carry function of government
5. Imbued w social policy
6. Police power to regulate private
business or individuals
CREATION of ADMIN BODIES
a. is an organ of govt, other than
a court and other than a
legislature;
b. which affects the rights of
private parties
c. through either adjudication or
rule-making.
a. refer to any of the various
units of the Government;
b. including a dept, bureau,
office, instrumentality or
GOCC, or a local govt or a
distinct unit therein.
Boards, commissions, dividions,
bureaus, depts., office, authority,
corporation, administration, division, or
agency.
a. it is either executinve (admin),
or legislative, or judicial; OR
b. it is a quasi-legislative or
quasi-judicial
Phil Postal Corp, PNR, MWSS, NEA,
NFA, NHA
NTC, HLURB
PVAO, GSIS, PAO, PhilHealth
BOC, BIR, BID, LRA
NLRC, ECC, SSC, SEC, DAR, COA
SEC, MTRCB, GAB, DDB
CHR – Art 13, Sec 17, 1987 Consti
LEGISLATIVE ENACTMENTS OMB 0 RA 9239, Optical Media Act of
(usual source of creation) 2003;
National Computer Center – PD 1480,
June 11, 1978;
Toll Regulatory Board – PD 1112
AUTHORITY of LAW Presidential Communications Group –
(delegated Executive) EO 4, July 30, 2010
ORGANIZATION of ADMIN AGENCIES
ACTIVITY DEFINITION EXAMPLE
I. CREATION a. bringing into existence; EO 122-A (Jan 30, 1987)
b. of an admin agency creating OMA
2. REORGANIZATION a. alteration of the EO 297 (July 25, 1987)
structure; Reorganization of OPS
b. of an admin body
3. ABOLITION a. terminating the EO 13 (nov. 15, 2010) –
existence; Abolishing PAGC
b. of an admin office
4. DEACTIVATION a. office continues to EO 191 (Jan. 7, 2000) –
exist; Deactivation of EIIB
b. albeit dormant
ABOLITION of ADMIN BODIES
BY VIRTUE OF ADMIN AGENCIES COVERED
CONSTI PROVISIONS a. for Constitutionally created
offices;
b. those created pursuant to law;
c. those created pursuant to
delegated authority.
LEGISLATIVE ENACTMENTS a. those created pursuant to law;
b. those created pursuant to
 delegated authority.
AUTHORITY of LAW a. pursuant to such delegated authority
POWER TO REORGANIZE UNDR EO 292
OP PROPER PRESIDENT CAN: BUKLOD NG
a. abolish, KAWANING EIIB v
Sec 31(1) consolidate, or ZAMORA
EO 292 merge units;
OR Facts:
b. transfer In 2000, Pres Estrada
functions from issued EO 191, ordering
one unit to deactivation of EIIB and
another. transfer of its functions to
BOC and NBI
HELD: As far as offices
in the executive dept are
concerned, Pres’ power of
control may justify him to
inactivate functions of
particular office, or
certain laws of control
may grant him authority
to carry out
reorganization measures.
BAGAOISAN v NTA
Facts:
In 1998, Pres Estrada
issued E) 29
“Streamlining of NTA.”
Drinita Bagaoisan, et al
eployed at NTA-Batac,
were terminated from
employment.
HELD:
In the present instance,
involving neither an
abolition nor transfer of
offices, the assailed
action is a mere
reorganization under the
general provisions of the
law consisting mainly of
streamlining the NTA in
the interest of simplicity,
economy and efficiency.
It is an act well within the
authority of Pres
motivated and carried out
in good faith.
OUTSIDE OP PROPER PRESIDENT CAN: DOMINGO v ZAMORA
(BUT STILL WITHIN a. transfer
OP) functions or Facts:
agencies: OP to In 1999, Pres. Estrada
Sec 31 (2), (3), EO 292 other depts. Or issued EO 81 transferring
agencies; OR the Sports Programs of
b. transfer DECS to PSC. Rosa
function or Domingo et al went to
agencies: other SC, arguing that: a) EO
Dept of 81 is unconsti for being
Agencies in OP undue legislation by Pres.
Estrada; b) DECS is not
part of OP, Sec 31(2),(3)
of EO 292 authorizes Pres
to transfer any function or
agency of DECS to OP.
PSC is attanced to OP.
Therefore,Pres. Has
authority to transfer
function of DECS to PSC.
Reorganization of Administrative Bodies
Purposes Simplicity Larin vs. Executive Secretary
Economy
Efficiency Facts: In 1993, Pres. Ramos issues EO 132
streamlining BIR. Excise Tax Service, headed
by Larin was abolished. Then, Pres. Ramos
appointed 10 BIR Assistant Commissioners,
 excluding Larin authority III Chap. 10
EO 292 Fact: On Sept 30, 1998, Pres Estrada issues EO
Held: If abolition is done for political reasons The 29 “ Streamlining of NTA” Drianita Bagaoisan,
or to defeat security of tenure, or otherwise not president… in et al, all occupying different positions at NTA-
in good faith, no valid abolision takes place and order to Batac, received notices of their termination
whatever is done is void ab initio achieve effective 30 days from receipt thereof
simplicity,
Limitations GOOD Dario vs. Mison economy and Held: In the present instance, involving neither
FAITH efficiency, an abolition nor transfer of offices, the assailed
Facts: On Jan, 1988, Commissioner Salvador shall have action is a mere reorganization under the
Mison notified various Customs officials that continuing general provisions of the law consisting mainly
their services were terminated. Deputy authority to of streamlining the NTA in the interest of
Commissioner Cesar Dario was one of the 394 reorganize the simplicity, economy and efficiency. It is an act
officials and employees of BOC who were administrative well within the authority of the President
separated from the service structure of motivated and carried out in good faith
the OP
Held: Terminating 394 BOC employees and
thereafter hiring 522 replacements is a revamp
pure and simple. Mison may carry out 2nd LECTURE
reorganization under the transitory provisions
of the 1987 Constitution. But such a BASIC CONCEPTS
reorganization should be subject to the criterion
of good faith INVESTIGATORY POWER a. power to carry out a
(Inquisitorial Power) systematic or formal inquiry;
Power to Reorganize b. on violation of laws;
Executive Art. VII Sec. Buklod ng Kawaning vs. Executive Secretary c. and to gather information on
power 17, 1987 proposed legislations.
Constituion Facts: On Jan 7, 2000, Pres. Estrada issued 191, JUDICIAL FUNCTION a. power to adjudicate;
ordering deactivation of EIIB and transfer of its b. upon rights and obligations of
The president functions to BOC and NBI. On March 29, parties.
shall have the 2000, Estrada issued EO 233 providing that JUDICIAL DISCRETION a. power to evaluate evidence
control of all EIIB personnel shall be deemed separated from submitted to it;
the executive service April 30, 2000 b. on the facts and circumstances
departments, presented.
bureaus and Held: As far as offices in the executive TEST OF JUDICIAL FUNCTION a. not the exercise of judicial
offices department are concerned, the Presidents power discretion;
of control may justify him to inactivate b. but the power and authority to
functions of a particular office, or certain laws adjudicate;
may grant him authority to carry out c. upon rights and obligations of
reorganization measures parties before it.
Continuing Sec. 31 Book Bagaoisan vs. National Tobacco Authority
INVESTIGATORY POWER undertake investigation of
crimes and other offenses
Principle no. 1  to investigate is not to adjudicate or adjudge. against the laws of the
Philippines, upon its
CASE: CARINO V CHR initiative and as public
204 SCRA 483 interest may require.”
PROSECUTION Public Prosecutor Sec. 13, Art. 11, 1987
Facts: PURPOSES Constitution – to
MPSTA and ACT members – on Sept. 17, 1990, undertook “mass concerned Ombudsman investigate on its own, or
actions” to “dramatize” their plight for failure of authorities to act upon their on complaint by any
grievances. person, any act of
omission of any public
Sec. Isidro Carino – issued return to work order in 24 hours to striking teachers or official, employee, office
face dismissal. For failure to heed the order, teachers were charged, preventively or agency, when such act
suspended for 90 days, and temporarily replaced. or omission appears to be
illegal, unjust, improper
Teachers – complained to CHR that they were replaced without notice and for no or inefficient.”
reasons. Cariño moved for dismissal for lack of jurisdiction. CHR denied the motion AID TO OTHER SEC Sec. 5 (a), Securities
and ruled that there had been violation of the teachers’ civil and political rights, POWERS Regulation Code (RA
which CHR was employed to investigate. Cariño moved to elevate the case to SC. 8799) – “Have
jurisdiction and
HELD: supervision over all
a. The only thing CHR can do, if it concludes that Sec. Cariño was in error, corporations, partnerships
is refer matter to appropriate government agency or tribunal for assistance, or associations who are
that would be CSC. It cannot arrogate unto itself the appellate jurisdiction the grantees of primary
of CSC. franchises and/or license
b. The most that may be conceded to CHR is that it may investigate, i.e., or permit issued by the
receive evidence and make findings of the fact as regards claimed human government.”
rights violations involving civil and political rights.
Sec. 5 (d), Securities
POWERS OF GRANT OF INVESTIGATORY POWER Regulation Code (RA
INFORMATION CHR Sec. 18, Art. 13, 1897 8799) – “Regulate,
GATHERING Constitution – “To investigate or supervise
NBI investigate, on its own, or the activities of the
on complaint by any persons to ensure
party, all forms of human compliance.”
rights violations
involving civil and
political rights.” SCOPE AND EXTENT OF INVESTIGATORY POWERS
SCOPE EXTENT ILLUSTRATIVE CASE
Sec. 1, RA 157 – “To 1. INITIATION OF On complaint or own VILLALUZ V
INVESTIGATION motion ZALDIVAR – power of unconstitutional, because
(examine, explore, control of President may secretary is not a judge.
inquire) extend to power to 4. ACCOUNTS, Access to documents of CATURA v CIR –
investigate, to suspend or RECORDS, REPORTS person being investigated. Documents required to be
to remove officers and or STATEMENTS produced constitutes of
employees who belong to most solid character as to
executive department whether or not there was
(presidential appointees). failure to comply with
2. CONDUCT OF May be held in private RUIZ V DRILON – mandates of law.
INVESTIGATION respondent in admin cases
(audit, physical is not entitled to be 5. ATTENDANCE OF No inherent power to: EVANGELISTA v
investigation, monitor) informed of the findings WITNESSES JARENCIO – subpoena is
and recommendations of a. require within legal competence
investigating committee. attendance; of PAGRO to issue
b. put under oath; pursuant to EO 4(5)
SEC. OF JUSTICE V require to which empowered it to
LANTION – due process testify “summon witness...
rights of notice and relevant to investigation.”
hearing may be invoked 6. HEARING May be held but not OFFICE COURT
at evaluation stage of necessary part of ADMINISTRATOR v
extradition proceedings. investigation CANQUE – admin due
process cannot be fully
PEFIANCO V MORAL – equated with due process
respondent in admin case in its strict judicial sense.
is not entitled to be A formal or trial-type
informed of the findings hearing is required.
and recommendations of 7. CONTEMPT Requisites: CARMELO v RAMOS –
investigating committee. PROCEEDINGS one who invokes Sec.
3. INSPECTION AND No search warrant CAMARA V (failing to appear or 1. Statutory grant; 580, RAC, must first
EXAMINATION required. MUNICIPAL COURT – refusing to produce 2. Performing show he has “authority to
(routine inspection for there was no emergency documents) quasi-judicial take testimony or
enforcement of Conduct inspection demanding immediate function evidence” before he can
regulations) during reasonable hours. access. Yet no warrant apply to courts for
was obtained. punishment of hostile
witnesses.
SALAZAR V
ACHACOSO – Art. 38, MASANGCAY v
LC, which grants Sec of COMELEC – When
Labor authority to issue Comelec exercises
orders of arrest, search ministerial function it
and seizure, is cannot exercise the power
 to punish contempt a. The Chief Exec, as admin head of Villaluz, is empowered to commence admin
because such power is proceedings motu propio, without need of any previous verified complaint.
inherently judicial in
nature. 2. CONDUCT OF INVESTIGATION
Principle no. 1 Respondent in admin case is not entitled
BEDOL v COMELEC – to be informed of the findings and
to withhold from recommendations of investigating
Comelec the power of committee.
contempt would render RUIZ v DRILON
nugatory its investigative
power , which is an Facts:
essential incident to its Dr. Eliseo Ruiz – was ordered dismissed by Pres. Corazon Aquino for dishonesty
mandate to secure honest and grave misconduct as president of Central Luzon State University (CLSU). ES
and credible elections. Franklin Drilon denied Ruiz’s MR.
8. RULES OF Admin agency is given GAOIRAN v ALCALA –
PROCEDURE and wide latitude in admin proceedings, Ruiz – filed petition for prohibition w CA, which issued TRO. After 8 days, Ruiz
EVIDENCE technical rules on filed w SC pet for annulment of AO 218 as well as of orders of Drilon denying his
procedure and evidence MR. CA dismissed the petition as forum shopping. Thus, Ruiz went to SC alleging
are not strictly applied that he was not informed of the findings of the investigation conducted against him.
HELD:
I. INITIATION OF INVESTIGATION a. Ruiz is not entitled to be informed of the findings and recommendations of
Principle Admin agency or official may initiate investigating committee created into charges filed against him.
investigation on a complaint or on its b. He is entitled only to an admin decision that is based on substantial
own motion. evidence and a reasonable opportunity to meet the charges made against
VILLALUZ v ZALDIVAR him and the evidence presented against him during the hearings of the
investigating committees.
Facts: PEFIANCO v MORAL
Ruben Villaluz – was appointed Administrator of Motor Vehicles Office (MVO).
Facts:
Cong. Joaquin Roces (Chairman of the Committee on Good Government) – Maria Luis Moral (Chief Librarian, National Library) – was charged with
informed the President about the findings of his Committee concerning alleged gross dishonesty, grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the
mismanagement and inefficiency committed by Villaluz in MVO. Cong. Roces service.
recommended the replacement of Villaluz.
Moral – filed Petition for Production of Investigation Committee Report purportedly
President – dismissed Villaluz, after the investigating committee created thereby to guide her on whatever action to take. Her petition was denied. She filed for
submitted its report. mandamus. RTC denied motion to dismiss filed by Gloria. On appeal, CA, sustained
RTC. Gloria went to SC.
Villaluz – claims that the admin proceedings conducted against him are illegal since HELD:
there was no previous verified complaint against him. a. A respondent in admin case is not entitled to be informed of the findings
and recommendations of any investigating committee created to inquire
HELD: into charges filed against him.
 b. He is only entitled to the decision based on substantial evidence and a
reasonable opportunity to meet the charges and evidence presented against
her during the hearings of the investigating committee.
2. CONDUCT OF INVESTIGATION
Principle # 2: due process rights of notice and hearing may be invoked at evaluation
stage of extradition proceedings.
SEC. OF JUSTICE v LANTION
Facts:
Sec. Franklin Drilon – formed a panel to evaluate the request for extradition by the
US government of Mark Jimenez, who is wanted in the US for various crimes.
Jimenez – pending evaluation, requested for copies of extradition request and
documents submitted.
Drilon – denied the requests on the ground that, inter alia, that it’s premature to
furnish Jimenez documents.
Judge Ralph Lantion – upon pet of Jimenez directed DOJ to maintain status quo.
Drilon went to SC.
HELD:
a. one will search in vain the RP-US Extradition Treaty, the Extradition Law
(PD 1069), as well as American jurisprudence and procedures in
extradition, for any prohibition against the confinement of two basic due
process rights of notice and hearing during the evaluation stage of the
extradition proceedings.
b. Jimenez does not only face clear and present danger of loss of property or
employment, but of liberty as itself, which may eventually lead to his
forcible banishment to a foreign land.
3. INSPECTION AND EXAMINATION
Principle # 1: no search is required but inspection must be conducted during
reasonable hours.
CAMARA v MUNICIPAL COURT
Facts:
Camara – was a lessee of the ground floor of an apartment building.
San Francisco Health Department – received information that Camara, was using the
rear of his leasehold as residence. Claiming that the building’s occupancy permit did
not allow residential use of the ground floor, inspector of the Health Department
demanded that Camara permit an inspection of the premises.
Camara – refused to allow the inspection because the inspector lacked search
warrant.
HELD:
a. There was no emergency demanding immediate access; in fact, the
inspectors made three tips to the building in an attempt to obtain Camara’s
consent to the search.
b. Yet no warrant was obtained and thus Camara was unable to verify either
the need for or the appropriate limits if the inspection.
3. INSPECTION and EXAMINATION
Principle # 2: Probable cause must be determined personally by the judge.
SALAZAR v ACHACOSO
Facts:
Tomas Achacoso (POEA Administrator) – ordered the seizure of documents and
paraphernalia being used as means of committing illegal recruitment owned by
Hortencia Salazar.
Salazar – requested POEA that the personal properties seized be immediately
returned in the ground that said seizure violate Sec. 2, Art 3 of the Phil. Consti
which guarantees right of the people “to be secure in their perons, houses, papers,
and effects against unreasonable searches and seizure of whatever nature and for any
purpose.” Before POEA could act on the request, Salazar filed suit for Prohibition
with SC.
HELD:
a. The Sec. of Labor (or the POEA Administrator), not being a judge may no
longer issue search or arrest warrants.
b. Art. 38, par c of LC, empowering Labor Secretary to issue search and
arrest warrants in illegal recruitment cases is declared unconstitutional.
4. ACCOUNTS, RECORDS, REPORTS, or STATEMENTS
Principle: accounts, records, reports, or statements may be required to be delivered
and deposited with admin body at the hearing.
CATURA v CIR
Facts:
Pablo Catura and Luz Salvador – President and Treasurer, respectively, of Phil. subpoena power of PARGO is confined to mere quasi-judicial or
Virginia Tobacco Admin Employees Assoc (PVTAEA), were charged before the adjudicatory functions would inactive the Agency in its investigatory
CIR with “unauthorized disbursement of union funds.” functions.

CIR – required Catura and Salvador to deliver and deposit all Assoc’s books of 6. HEARING
accounts and other documents related to finances of the union. Principles: in admin investigation, formal or trial-type hearing is not required.
OFFICE of COURT ADM. V CANQUE
Catura and Salvador – filed MR on the grund that the order was beyond the power
CIR to issue. Facts:
HELD: Sylvia Canque (Clerk of Court of Cebu) – was arrested by NBI after an entrance
a. All that the challenged order did was to require said union officers to operation. SC treated the NBI entrapment as admin complaint for grave misconduct.
“deliver and deposit” with CIR all docs related to its finances at the Case was referred to OCA for investigation, report and recommendation. SC, upon
hearing. recommendation of OCA, reassigned case to RTC-Cebu for investigation, report and
b. The docs required to be purchased constitutes evidence of the most solid recommendation.
character as to WON there was a failure to comply w the mandates of the
law. Investigating Judge – found Canque guilty of grave misconduct and recommended
penalty of dismissal.
5. ATTENDANCE OF WITNESSES
Principles: it is common for statues to confer such powers on admin agencies. OCA – recommended that Report of Investigating Judge be set aside and complaint
EVANGELISTA v JARENCIO be reinvestigated upon finding that Canque was not informed of her right to be heard
by herself and counsel during the investigation which allegedly amounted to denial
Facts: of her right to due process.
Presidential Agency on Reforms and Govt Operations (PARGO) – created through HELD:
EO 4, with power to investigate immoral practices, graft and corruptions, and to
investigate any public official or employee. Further, it is vested w power to summon a. The essence of due process is that a party be afforded reasonable
witnesses, administer oaths, take testimony or evidence relevant to its investigation. opportunity to be heard and to presented any evidence he may have in
support of his defense.
Uses. Quirico Evangelista – issued subpoena to Fernando Manalastas, Public Sercice b. Technical rules of procedure and evidence are not strictly applied to admin
Officer of Manila. proceedings. Thus, admin due process cannot be fully equated w due
process it its strict judicial sense. A formal or trial-type hearing is not
Manalastas – instead of obeying subpoena, filed w CFI-Manila Pet for prohibition required.
contenting that Pargo’s subpoena power is exercisable when it is performing quasi-
judicial or adjudicatory function. Contempt Proceedings
Principle No. 1 Power to punish contempt must be
Judge Hilarion Jarencio – granted the Pet. Thus, Usec. Evangelista went to SC. expressly granted to administrative
HELD: body
a. The subpoena is well within the legal competence of PARGO to issue Carmelo v. Ramos
pursuant to EO 4(5) which empowered it to “summon witness...relevant to
the investigation.” Facts:
b. Subpoena power operates in all functions of PARGO. It is not merely Jesus Carmelo – tasked by virtue of an EO issued by the Mayor of Manila to
exercisable in quasi-judicial or adjudicatory function. To hold that head a committee to investigate anomalies involving certain personnel, issued
subpoenas to Armando Ramos, bookkeeper, to appear in connection with an
administrative case but Ramos refused. Carmelo filed in CFI Manila a petition to
declare Ramos in contempt. CFI ruled that there is no law empowering
committees created by municipal mayors to issue subpoenas and demand
witnesses to testify under oath
Carmelo – appealed to the SC invoking Sec. 580 RAC “when authority to take
testimony or evidence is conferred upon, any.. committee… such authority
shall.. comprehend the right to administer oaths and summons witnesses… Any
one who, without lawful excuse, fails to appear upon summons… shall be
subject to discipline as in case of contempt of court…”
Held:
One who invokes Sec. 580 must show he has authority to take testimony or
evidence before he can apply to courts for punishment of hostile witness
Nothing in the EO about such grant of power
Only power to investigate which does not imply delegation of power to take
testimony or evidence of witnesses whose appearance may be required by due
process of law
Contempt Proceedings
Principle No. 2 Effectiveness of quasi-judicial power
hinges on its authority to compel
attendance of parties and compel
attendance of parties and their
witnesses at hearings
Bedol vs. COMELEC
Facts:
Comelec task force – tasked to conduct factfinding investigation of allegation of
fraud and irregularities in the conduct of the May 24, 2007 elections in
Maguindanao
Lintang Bedol (PES for Maguindanao) – refused to appear during hearing and to
answer questions before the task force. Was found guilty of contempt of the
Commission and meted 6 months imprisonment. He filed MR, which was
denied. He elevated to the SC contending that COMELEC sitting as National
Board of Canvassers, was performing administrative not quasi-judicial
functions. He argued that the COMELEC, in that capacity, could not punish him
for contempt
Held:
Comelec through task force Maguindanao was exercising its quasi judicial
power in pursuit of truth behind the allegations of massive fraud during the
elections in Maguindanao
To withhold the power to punish individuals who refuse to appear during fact-
finding investigation would render nugatory the COMELECS investigative
power, which is an essential incident to its constitutional mandate to secure the
conduct of honest and credible elections
Contempt Proceedings
Principle No. 2 When granted, the power to punish
contempt may be exercised only when
administrative body is performing
quasi-judicial functions
Masangkay vs. COMELEC
Facts:
Benjamin Masangkay (Provincial Treasurer of Aklan) –was charged before the
COMELEC with contempt for having opened 3 ballot boxes containing official
and sample ballots not in the presence of division superintendent of schools,
provincial auditor and representatives of NP, LP and Citizen’s Party, as required
in a COMELEC Resolution
Masangkay – elevated the case to SC contending that even if he can be held
guilty of contempt, the decision is null and void for lack of valid power on the
part of the Commission to impose such disciplinary penalty
Held:
When COMELEC exercises ministerial functions, it cannot exercise the power
to punish contempt because such power is inherently judicial in nature
The resolution which COMELEC tried to enforce and for whose violation the
charge for contempt was filed against Masangcay merely call for the exercise of
an administrative or ministerial function for they merely concern the procedure
to be followed in the distribution of ballots and other election paraphernalia
among the different municipalities.
Contempt Proceedings
Principle No. 2 When granted, the power to punish
contempt may be exercised only when
administrative body is performing
quasi-judicial functions
Goairan vs. Alcala

Facts:
Florian Gaoiran (Head Teacher, Angadanan Agro-Industrial College) was
charged by Edmon Castillejo (Administrative officer of the same school), before
the CHED , for mauling him while he was performing his duties. Appended to
the complaint were verified criminal complaints filed by Castillejo and sworn
statements of his witnesses for assault to person in authority. Gaoiran was
preventively suspended for 90 days. He sought reconsideration contending that a
complaint was not under oath citing EO 292

Angel Alcala – dismissed Goairan from service, Gaoiran filed a petition with the
RTC, which ruled in his favor. On appeal, CA reversed RTC.
Held:

The verified complaint that Castillejo filed against Goairan, as well as the sworn
statements of his witnesses could very well be considered as constituting the
complaint against him

Government agency is given wide latitude in the scope of its exercise of its
investigative powers. After all, in administrative proceedings, technical rues of
procedure and evidence are not strictly applied