Civil Service Commission
Historical Background
The Second Philippine Commission legally established the civil service system in the
Philippines through Public Law No. 5 ("An Act for the Establishment and Maintenance of Our
Efficient and Honest Civil Service in the Philippine Island") in 1900. A Civil Service Board was
formed, which had a Chairman, a Secretary, and a Chief Examiner. The Board administered civil
service examinations and established criteria for appointment to government positions. In 1905,
it was reformed into a Bureau. In addition, the merit system was firmly established as the basis
for government employment in the Philippine Constitution of 1935. In the years that followed,
the Bureau's jurisdiction was expanded to include the three departments of government: national,
local, and national and local government corporations. Furthermore, Republic Act 2260, often
known as the Civil Service Law, was passed in 1959. This was the first comprehensive law
governing the Philippine bureaucracy, supplementing the fragmented administrative instructions
concerning government personnel administration published since 1900. This Act established the
Civil Service Commission, which replaced the Bureau of Civil Service. Furthermore, the
Commission's position as the core personnel agency of government was revised in 1975 by
Presidential Decree No. 807 (The Civil Service Decree of the Philippines). Its current mandate
stems from Article IX-B of the 1987 Constitution, which was implemented through Book V of
Executive Order No. 292 (The 1987 Administrative Code).
Constitutional and Legal Mandate
The Civil Service Commission was given the status of a department by Republic Act No.
2260, as modified, and was raised to a constitutional body by the 1973 Constitution. It was
restructured under PD No. 181 on September 24, 1972, and again under Executive Order No.
181 dated November 21, 1986. With the new Administrative Code of 1987 (EO 292), the
Commission is legally tasked to promote morale, efficiency, integrity, responsiveness,
progressiveness, and civility in the Civil Service.
Functions/Purpose
Under Executive Order No. 292, the Civil Service Commission shall perform the
following functions which are to administer and enforce the constitutional and statutory
provisions on the merit system for all levels and ranks in the Civil Service, prescribe, amend and
enforce rules and regulations for carrying into effect the provisions of the Civil Service Laws and
other pertinent laws, promulgate policies, standards and guidelines for the Civil Service and
adopt plans and programs to promote economical, efficient and effective personnel
administration in the government, formulate policies and regulations for the administration,
maintenance and implementation of position classification and compensation and set standards
for the establishment, allocation and reallocation of pay scales, classes and positions, and render
opinion and rulings on all personnel and other Civil Service matters which shall be binding on all
head of departments, offices and agencies and which may be brought to the Supreme Court on
certiorari. Furthermore, it is also responsible to appoint and discipline its officials and employees
in accordance with law and exercise control and supervision over the activities of the
Commission, control, supervise and coordinate Civil Service examinations. Any entity or official
in government may be called upon by the Commission to assist in the preparation and conduct of
said examinations including security, use of buildings and facilities as well as personnel and
transportation of examination materials which shall be exempt from inspection regulations,
prescribe all forms for Civil Service examinations, appointment, reports and such other forms as
may be required by law, rules and regulations, declare positions in the Civil Service as may
properly be primarily confidential, highly technical or policy determining, formulate, administer
and evaluate programs relative to the development and retention of qualified and competent
work force in the public service, hear and decide administrative cases instituted by or brought
before it directly or on appeal, including contested appointments, and review decisions and
action of its offices and of the agencies attached to it. Officials and employees who fail to
comply with such decisions, orders, or rulings shall be liable for contempt of the Commission. Its
decisions, orders or rulings shall be final and executory. Such decisions, orders, or rulings may
be brought to Supreme Court on certiorari by the aggrieved party within thirty (30) days from
receipt of the copy thereof, issues subpoena and subpoena duces tecum for the production of
documents and records pertinent to investigations and inquiries conducted by it in accordance
with its authority conferred by the Constitution and pertinent laws, advise the President on all
matters involving personnel management in the government service and submit to the President
an annual report on the personnel programs, and take appropriate actions on all appointments and
other personnel matters in the Civil Service including extension of service beyond retirement
age. Other important functions are to inspect and audit the personnel actions and programs of the
departments, agencies, bureaus, offices, local government including government-owned or
controlled corporations; conduct periodic review of the decisions and actions of offices or
officials to whom authority has been delegated by the Commission as well as the conduct of the
officials and the employees in these offices and apply appropriate sanctions whenever necessary,
delegate authority for the performance of any functions to departments, agencies and offices
where such functions may be effectively performed, administer the retirement program of
government officials and employees, and accredit government services and evaluate qualification
for retirement, keep and maintain personnel records of all officials and employees in the Civil
Service, and perform all functions properly belonging to a central personnel agency such as other
functions as may be provided by law.
The Ombudsman
Historical Background
The Ombudsman notion originated in Sweden. Sweden chose in its constitutional reform
of 1809 to establish a high legal officer elected by the Parliament dubbed the 'High Ombudsman'
to oversee the legality of the Government's and public administration's acts in general. The term
'Ombudsman' refers to a person who acts as a proxy for someone else, in this case, the people or
persons who report about alleged wrongdoings by the public administration. In the Philippines,
the predecessor of the current Office of the Ombudsman was established in 1978 by Presidential
Decree No. 1487, which established a more permanent Office of the Ombudsman known as the
Tanodbayan. Presidential Decree 1607 later altered this. Moreover, the Ombudsman's Office, as
we know it today, was established by the 1987 Constitution, which established a higher level of
accountability for government workers based on the principle that "public office is a public
trust." During the 1986 Constitutional Commission, Commissioner Jose C. Colayco stated, "to
call the attention of government officials to any impropriety, misconduct, or injustice, we
conceive the Ombudsman as a champion of the citizens." No. 6770, often known as the
Ombudsman Act, to define the office's organization.
Constitutional and Legal Mandate
According to the Office of the Ombudsman, the Ombudsman and his Deputies, as
protectors of the people shall act promptly on complaints filed in any form or manner against
officers or employees of the Government, or of any subdivision, agency or instrumentality
thereof, including government-owned or controlled corporations, and enforce their
administrative, civil and criminal liability in every case where the evidence warrants in order to
promote efficient service by the Government to the people (Section 13, R.A. No. 6770; see also
Section 12 Article XI of the 1987 Constitution). In addition, the Ombudsman shall give priority
to complaints filed against high ranking government officials and/or those occupying supervisory
positions, complaints involving grave offenses as well as complaints involving large sums of
money and/or properties (Sec. 15, R.A. No. 6770).
Functions/Purposes
The five (5) major functions of the Office of the Ombudsman are public assistance, graft
prevention, investigation, prosecution, and administrative adjudication.
The Sandigan Bayan
Historical Background
The creation of the Sandiganbayan was originally provided for by Article XIII of the
1973 Constitution: "SEC. 5. The National Assembly shall create a special court, to be known as
Sandiganbayan, which shall have jurisdiction over criminal and civil cases involving graft and
corrupt practices and such other offenses committed by public officers and employees, including
those in government-owned or controlled corporations, in relation to their office as may be
determined by law. In response to this mandate, the late President Ferdinand E. Marcos issued
Presidential Decree No. 1486 on June 11, 1978, creating the Sandiganbayan and elevating it to
the same level as the Courts of First Instance, now the Regional Trial Courts, using the
emergency legislative power granted to him by Amendment No. 6 of the 1976 Amendments to
the 1973 Constitution. However, by Presidential Decree No. 1606 issued on December 10, 1978,
the Sandiganbayan was elevated to the level of the Court of Appeals. The Sandiganbayan had
only one Division when it first opened its doors on February 12, 1979, consisting of the
Presiding Justice, Hon. Hon. Manuel R. Pamaran, as well as two Associate Justices, Hon. Hon.
Bernardo P. Fernandez and Mr. Romeo M. Escareal with a skeletal force of fifteen (15) soldiers.
The Second Division was activated at the start of the Court's third year of operation in 1981. On
August 4, 1982, three more Justices of the Third Division were appointed, completing the Court's
full membership. Furthermore, the historic EDSA Revolution of February 1986, which signified
the start of a new era, triggered significant changes throughout the whole government resources,
including the court. Both the 'Freedom Constitution' and the new Constitution, however, have
seen fit to keep the Sandiganbayan as one of the primary tools of public accountability. In
furtherance of this, its jurisdiction has been expanded to include the so-called 'ill-gotten wealth'
cases investigated by the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) through
Executive Orders No. 14 and No. 14-A. As part of the new government's reorganization
program, the resignation of some members of the Court was accepted, resulting in the
appointment of a new Presiding Justice in the person of Hon. Garchitorena, Francis E. Several
changes to the original law forming the Sandiganbayan have been enacted to further enhance its
functional and structural organization, the most recent of which are Republic Acts Nos. 7975 and
No. 8249. The Sandiganbayan's authority is now limited to matters involving public employees
with salary grades 27 and higher, according to the new laws. The Sandiganbayan has been
reformed and now consists of a Presiding Justice and fourteen (14) Associate Justices who sit in
five (5) Divisions of three Justices each in the trial and determination of matters.
Constitutional and Legal Mandate
According to 1973 and 1987 Philippine Constitution,
SEC. 5. The Batasang Pambansa shall create a special court, to be known as Sandiganbayan,
which shall have jurisdiction over criminal and civil cases involving graft and corrupt practices
and such other offenses committed by public officers and employees, including those in
government-owned or controlled corporations, in relation to their office as may be determined by
law. (Art. XIII), 1973 Constitution.
SEC. 4. The present anti-graft court known as the Sandiganbayan shall continue to function and
exercise its jurisdiction as now or hereafter may be provided by law. (Art. XI), 1987
Constitution.
Functions/Purposes
The Sandiganbayan is in charge of trying and ruling on criminal and civil matters
involving government officials and employees suspected of bribery and corruption, as well as
comparable other cases.
The Impeachment Trial
Historical Background
In 1949, President Elpidio Quirino was suspected of using government funds to refurbish
Malacaang Palace, purchasing furniture for the Presidential Palace with government monies, and
being involved in alleged diamond smuggling. This objection was dismissed by a Congressional
committee due to a lack of factual and legal foundation. In 1964, President Diosdado Macapagal
was accused of illegally importing rice to boost public support for an election, illegally
dismissing officials, using the military to intimidate the political opposition, and violating the
separation of governmental powers by ordering the deportation of an American businessman in
Congress' custody. All of the charges were dropped by a Congressional committee.
Constitutional and Legal Mandate
According to Section 2 of Article XI of the Constitution, the President, Vice President,
members of the Supreme Court, members of constitutional commissions, and the Ombudsman
may be impeached.
Functions/Purposes
Any member of the House of Representatives can file a verified impeachment complaint.
Any Filipino citizen may also register a complaint, which must be supported by a House
member. A verified complaint or impeachment resolution may also be filed by at least one-third
of House members. Given the current House membership of 292 members, this equates to at
least 97 members.
After hearings, the justice committee should file a formal resolution to the House plenary about
the impeachment complaint within 60 days of referral. If probable cause is found, the committee
will also propose a resolution establishing the Articles of Impeachment. For the Articles of
Impeachment to be approved by the Senate, at least one-third of House members must vote in
favor of them. This equates to 97 members of the current House of Representatives. All
impeachment cases will be tried and decided by the Senate in a full-fledged trial. If the President
is put on trial, the hearings will be presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. If
two-thirds of Senate members vote to convict an impeachable official in accordance with the
Articles of Impeachment, the individual is impeached.
References:
A Briefer on the Office of the Ombudsman | GOVPH. (n.d.). Official Gazette of the Republic of
the Philippines. https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/briefer-the-office-of-the-ombudsman/
Bueza, M. (2017, March 16). FAST FACTS: How does impeachment
work? RAPPLER. https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/164340-fast-facts-
impeachment-process/
Guevarra, P. (2014, February 20). Mandate. https://web.csc.gov.ph/2014-02-20-02-22-48/2014-
02-20-02-29-25.html
Mandate | Office of the Ombudsman.
(n.d.). https://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/about-us/mandate/
Wikipedia contributors. (2022). Impeachment in the
Philippines. Wikipedia. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_Philippines
