PHILIPPINE

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
& ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
ATTY. RONN DALE B. CASTILLO
 PUBLIC
Of concerning people as a whole
 ADMINISTRATION
1. As a function; the execution, in non-judicial matters, of the law or will of the
State as expressed by competent authority.

2. As an organization: that group or aggregate of persons in whose hands the

reins of government are for the time being.
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
That branch of modern law under which the executive department of government
acting in quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial capacity, interferes with the conduct of the
individual for the purpose of promoting the well-being of the community.
OVERVIEW I.

II.
General Principles of Administrative Law and
Powers of Administrative Bodies
Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies, Judicial
Review of Administrative Remedies
III. General Principles of Law on Public Officers
IV. Eligibility, Qualifications of Public Officers, De
Facto Officers
V. Commencement of Official relations, Powers and
Duties, liability of Public Officers
VI. Rights of Public Officers, Termination of Official
Relationship
I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
AND POWERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES
 SCOPE
1. Laws defining the government's administrative organization and
structure.
2. Laws enforced by administrative authorities.
3. Laws governing public officers, including their powers, rights, duties,
liabilities, and election.
4. Laws establishing administrative agencies, outlining their powers,
functions, and procedures, including resolving disputes involving
private interests.
5. Remedies (administrative or judicial) for those affected by
administrative actions or decisions.
6. Judicial review or relief concerning administrative actions or
decisions.
7. Rules, regulations, orders, and decisions by administrative authorities
for interpreting and enforcing laws.
8. Judicial decisions and doctrines related to administrative law.
AS DISTINGUISHED FROM INTERNATIONAL LAW
As to laying of rules: Administrative law lays down the rules which
shall guide the officers of the administration in their actions as
agents of the government.
International law on the other hand, cannot be regarded as binding
except insofar as it has been adopted into the administrative law of
the state.
AS DISTINGUISHED FROM CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
As to function: Constitutional law prescribes the general plan or
framework of governmental organization, while administrative law
gives and carries out this plan in its minutest details;
AS DISTINGUISHED FROM CRIMINAL LAW
As to application: Criminal law or penal laws consist really of a body
of penal sanctions which are applied to all branches of the law,
including administrative law.
POWERS OF
ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES
1. QUASI-LEGISLATIVE
Spirit Homeowners Association v. Secretary of Defense, G.R. No. 163980, August 3, 2006
DELEGATION OF POWERS
The delegation of powers refers to the transfer of authority from one
government body or official to another, particularly from the legislative
branch to administrative agencies or the executive branch.
DELEGATION OF POWERS
This is necessary to ensure efficient governance, as the legislature cannot
handle all the details of implementation and regulation. However, the
delegation must adhere to constitutional limits to prevent abuse or
overreach.
Administrative Agencies may exercise quasi-legislative powers only if there
exists a law which delegates these powers to them.
REQUISITES FOR VALIDITY
For an exercise of quasi-legislative power to be valid, it must be:

1) Issued under authority of law (Department of Health v. Philip Morris Philip Morris Philippines
Manufacturing, G.R. No. 202943, March 25, 2015)
2) Within the scope and purview of law
3) Reasonable
 Q1
The Land Transportation and Franchising Regulatory Board (LTFRB) issued a regulation
requiring all public utility vehicles (PUVs) to install GPS devices within six months. A
transport group challenged the regulation, arguing that the LTFRB had no authority to
issue such a requirement, as the enabling law only mentioned "ensuring passenger
safety" without specifying technological requirements.

Was the LTFRB’s exercise of quasi-legislative power valid?

 A1
Yes, the LTFRB’s regulation is a valid exercise of quasi-legislative power. The enabling
law authorizes the LTFRB to implement measures to ensure passenger safety, which
provides a sufficient standard for its actions. The regulation requiring GPS installation is
reasonably related to the legislative policy of passenger safety, as it enables monitoring
and enhances security. Administrative agencies may use their technical expertise to
create specific regulations as long as they adhere to the purpose and standards set by
the enabling law.
2. QUASI-JUDICIAL OR
ADJUDICATORY POWER
Proceedings partake of the character of judicial proceedings. Administrative
body is normally granted the authority to promulgate its rules of procedure
provided they do not increase, diminish, or modify substantive rights and
subject to the disapproval by the Supreme Court.
REQUISITES OF
ADMINISTRATIVE DUE PROCESS
1. Right to hearing;
2. Tribunal must consider evidence presented;
3. Decision must have something to support itself;
4. Evidence must be substantial;
5. Decision must be based on the evidence adduced at the hearing, or at least contained
in the record and disclosed to the parties;
6. Board or its judges must act on its or their independent consideration of the acts and
the law of the case, and not simply accept the views of a subordinate in arriving at a
decision;
7. Decisions must be rendered in such a manner that the parties to the controversy can
know the various involved and the reasons for the decision rendered;

SPO1 Leonito Acuzar v. Aproniano Jorolan, G.R. No. 177878, April 7, 2010.
MIAA v. Airspan Corporation, G.R. No. 157581, December 1, 2004.
 Q1
An employee was terminated by the Civil Service Commission (CSC) for alleged
inefficiency. During the administrative hearing, the only evidence presented was an
anonymous complaint letter, with no supporting documents or testimony. The
employee challenged the termination, claiming it was not based on substantial
evidence.

Was the CSC’s decision valid under administrative due process?

 A1
No, the CSC’s decision is not valid. One of the requisites of administrative due process is
that the decision must be based on substantial evidence, which is defined as relevant
evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. An
anonymous complaint letter, without corroboration, does not meet the threshold of
substantial evidence. The absence of reliable evidence undermines the validity of the
termination, and the employee’s challenge should be upheld.
II. EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES,
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
EXHAUSTION OF
ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
Whenever there is an available administrative remedy provided by law, no
judicial recourse can be made until all such remedies have been availed of
and exhausted. The premature invocation of the intervention of the court is
fatal to one’s cause of action. (Mark Jerome Magalang v. PAGCOR, G.R. No. 190566,
December 11, 2013.)
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF
ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS
General rule: Except when the Constitution requires or allows it, judicial
review may be granted or withheld as Congress chooses. The law may
provide that a determination made by an administrative agency shall be
final and irreviewable. In such case, there is no violation of due process.
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF
ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS
Exception: The judicial power includes the power of the courts of justice to
determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion
tantamount to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any agency or
instrumentality of government, clearly means that judicial review of
administrative decisions cannot be denied the courts when there is an
allegation of such.
 Q1
Maria, a government employee, was penalized by her agency's disciplinary board for
alleged misconduct. Instead of appealing to the Civil Service Commission (CSC), as
provided by law, Maria immediately filed a petition with the Regional Trial Court (RTC)
claiming that the disciplinary board's decision was unjust. The RTC dismissed her
petition, citing the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies. Maria argues
that the RTC should have entertained her case.

Is the RTC's dismissal correct? Why or why not?

 A1
The RTC's dismissal is correct. Under the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative
remedies, a party must first avail themselves of all administrative remedies provided by
law before seeking judicial intervention. In this case, Maria failed to appeal to the CSC,
the administrative body designated by law to review the disciplinary board's decision.
Her premature filing in court violated the doctrine, rendering her petition dismissible.
Judicial recourse becomes available only after all administrative remedies have been
exhausted, unless there are exceptions such as urgency, irreparable injury, or clear
evidence of grave abuse of discretion.
 Q1
The Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) issued a decision imposing penalties on a
power company for alleged violations of its regulations. The law explicitly states that
ERC's decisions are final and unappealable. The company filed a petition for certiorari
with the Court of Appeals, alleging that the ERC committed grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.

Can the Court of Appeals entertain the petition despite the law stating that ERC
decisions are final and unappealable? Why or why not?
 A1
Yes, the Court of Appeals can entertain the petition. While the law may declare
administrative decisions as final and unappealable, this does not bar judicial review
when there is an allegation of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction. The Constitution grants courts the power to determine whether a
government agency acted within its jurisdiction and complied with due process. If the
company can demonstrate that the ERC acted arbitrarily or exceeded its authority, the
courts can review and potentially overturn the agency's decision. This serves as an
exception to the general rule on the finality of administrative decisions.
III. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW ON PUBLIC
OFFICERS
PUBLIC OFFICE
The right, authority or duty, created and conferred by law, by which for a
given period, either fixed by law or enduring at the pleasure of the creating
power, an individual is invested with some sovereign power of government
to be exercised by him for the benefit of the public (Fernandez v. Sto.
Tomas).
ELEMENTS OF PUBLIC OFFICE
1. Created by law or by authority of law;
2. Possess a delegation of a portion of the sovereign powers of
government, to be exercised for the benefit of the public;
3. Powers conferred and duties imposed must be defined, directly or
impliedly, by legislature or by legislative authority;
4. Duties must be performed independently and without the control of a
superior power other than the law, unless they be those of an inferior or
subordinate office created or authorized by the legislature, and by it
placed under the general control of a superior office or body;
5. Must have permanence or continuity
PUBLIC OFFICER
A person who holds public office.

Revised penal code says a public officer is one who is elected, appointed,
performs public function in the government, whether agent or subordinate,
of any rank or class.

Sec. 2 of RA 3019, the term “public officer” includes elective and appointive
officials and employees, permanent or temporary, whether in the classified,
unclassified or exempt service, receiving compensation, even nominal, from
the government.
IV. ELIGIBILITY, QUALIFICATIONS OF PUBLIC
OFFICERS, DE FACTO OFFICERS
 WHO ARE QUALIFIED?
Qualification is understood in two terms:

1) May refer to endowments, qualities, or attributes which make an

individual eligible for public office e.g. CITIZENSHIP

1) May refer to the act of entering into the performance of the fuction e.g.
TAKING THE OATH OF OFFICE
When used in the sense of endowments, qualities or attributes, the individual
must possess the qualifications at the time of appointment or election and
continuously for as long as the official relationship continues.
 When referring to the act of entering into the performance of the
functions of the office, failure of an officer to perform an act required by
law could affect the officer’s title to the given office.
 DISQUALIFICATION
The legislature has the right to prescribe disqualification in the same
manner that it can prescribe qualifications, provided that the prescribed
disqualifications do not violate the Constitution.
 DE FACTO OFFICERS
One who has the reputation of being the officer that he assumes to be, and
yet is not a good officer in point of law.
 DE FACTO OFFICERS
The acts of the de facto public officer, insofar as they affect the public, are
valid, binding and with full legal effect. The doctrine is intended not for the
protection of the public officer, but for the protection of the public and the
individuals who get involved in the official acts of persons discharging the
duties of a public office.
ELEMENTS
1. A validly existing public office.
2. Actual physical possession of the said office.
3. There is color of title to the office in any of the following cases;

a) By reputation or acquiescence
b) The officer failed to conform to a requirement imposed by law
c) Appointment or election is void due to ineligibility, want of authority of
the appointing or electing authority, or irregularity in appointment or
election unknown to the public
d) An unconstitutional law, before the law is declared unconstitutional
V. COMMENCEMENT OF OFFICIAL RELATIONS,
POWERS AND DUTIES, LIABILITY OF PUBLIC
OFFICERS
COMMENCEMENT OF OFFICIAL RELATIONS
 FOR APPOINTED
Appointed public officers begin their official relations when the following
conditions are satisfied:

a. Issuance of Appointment
• An appointment is a discretionary act of the appointing authority (e.g., the President or
department heads) under the authority granted by the Constitution, law, or ordinance.

• The appointment must be evidenced by a formal document specifying the position and signed
by the appointing authority.
 FOR APPOINTED
Appointed public officers begin their official relations when the following
conditions are satisfied:

b. Confirmation, if required
• Certain appointments, such as those for cabinet secretaries and other high-ranking officials,
require confirmation by the Commission on Appointments (CA). Until confirmed, the appointee
cannot fully assume office.

• If confirmation is not required, the appointment takes effect once the appointee accepts it.
 FOR APPOINTED
Appointed public officers begin their official relations when the following
conditions are satisfied:

c. Acceptance of Appointment
• Acceptance is necessary to complete the appointment process. The appointee may accept the
position explicitly (e.g., by a written letter) or implicitly (e.g., by taking the oath of office or
assuming the duties of the position).
 FOR APPOINTED
Appointed public officers begin their official relations when the following
conditions are satisfied:

d. Assumption of Office
• The public officer must take the oath of office as required under Article VII, Section 5 of the
Constitution, and applicable laws.

• The appointee must also meet the qualifications prescribed by law for the position, such as
educational requirements, age, and other eligibility criteria.

• The officer assumes office either on the date specified in the appointment or upon taking the
oath of office, whichever comes later.
 FOR ELECTED
Elected public officers begin their official relations as follows:

a. Declaration of Election
• The officer’s election must first be proclaimed by the appropriate electoral authority (e.g., the
Commission on Elections or the Board of Canvassers). This certifies that the candidate has won
the election.
 FOR ELECTED
Elected public officers begin their official relations as follows:

b. Oath of Office
• Like appointed officials, elected public officers must also take the oath of office before entering
the performance of their duties. This oath is a constitutional and legal requirement.

• Failure to take the oath of office renders the election incomplete, and the individual cannot
begin exercising the powers of the position.
 FOR ELECTED
Elected public officers begin their official relations as follows:

c. Start of Term
• Elected officials assume office at the start of their prescribed term, as set by the Constitution,
law, or ordinance. For example:
• The President, Vice President, Senators, and Members of the House of Representatives
start their terms on June 30 following their election.
• Local government officials assume office on noon of June 30 following their election.

• If an election is contested, the proclaimed winner assumes office pending resolution of the
case, unless a court issues a temporary restraining order or a similar directive.
 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR BOTH
APPOINTED AND ELECTED OFFICERS
Oath of Office
• This is a formal declaration of commitment to faithfully perform the duties of the office and
uphold the Constitution and the laws of the land.
• It must be taken before a competent authority (e.g., notary public or a government official
authorized to administer oaths).
 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR BOTH
APPOINTED AND ELECTED OFFICERS
Filing of Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN)
• As required under the Constitution and RA 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for
Public Officials and Employees), the SALN must be filed upon assumption of office.
 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR BOTH
APPOINTED AND ELECTED OFFICERS
Compliance with Eligibility Requirements
• These include qualifications like citizenship, residency, age, and other standards specific to the
position.
 LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR BOTH
APPOINTED AND ELECTED OFFICERS
Compliance with Eligibility Requirements
• These include qualifications like citizenship, residency, age, and other standards specific to the
position.
SUSPENSION OF OFFICIAL RELATIONS
 SUSPENSION OF OFFICIAL RELATIONS
For both appointed and elected officials, their ability to exercise
official functions may be suspended due to:

• A pending election protest or quo warranto case.

• Failure to satisfy statutory or constitutional requirements.
• Impeachment, administrative suspension, or preventive suspension
during investigations.
 Q1
Juan was appointed as a regional director by the Secretary of the Department of
Agriculture. The appointment was duly signed and issued on July 1, 2025. On July 5,
2025, Juan took his oath of office but failed to submit his Statement of Assets,
Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN). He immediately assumed office and started
performing his duties.

Can Juan validly exercise his functions as regional director?

 A1
No, Juan cannot validly exercise his functions as a regional director. While he was issued
an appointment and took his oath of office, he failed to comply with the legal
requirement of filing his SALN. Under RA 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards
for Public Officials and Employees), the filing of a SALN is mandatory for public officials
upon assumption of office. Non-compliance renders his assumption incomplete, and he
cannot validly perform his duties until this requirement is met.
 Q1
Maria was declared the winner of the mayoral elections in her municipality. Her
proclamation was made on May 15, 2025. On June 30, 2025, Maria did not take her
oath of office, citing personal reasons. Her rival, who had filed an election protest,
argued that Maria’s failure to take her oath of office meant she forfeited her right to
assume the position.

Can Maria still assume office as mayor?

 A1
Maria cannot assume office until she takes her oath of office. Taking the oath of office
is a constitutional requirement for public officers before entering the performance of
their duties. Without it, her assumption of office remains incomplete, regardless of her
proclamation as the winner of the election. However, Maria does not forfeit her right to
assume the position if she takes her oath of office later, as long as the law does not
specify a deadline and no valid successor has yet been declared.
 Q1
Pedro, an elected congressman, was proclaimed the winner of the elections. His
opponent filed an election protest claiming massive electoral fraud. The House of
Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) has yet to resolve the protest. Pedro took his
oath of office and was allowed to participate in the sessions of Congress. His opponent
argues that Pedro cannot perform his duties until the protest is resolved.

Is the opponent’s argument valid?

 A1
No, the opponent’s argument is not valid. Pedro, as the proclaimed winner, has the
right to assume office and perform his duties pending the resolution of the election
protest. Proclamation by the electoral authority entitles the winner to assume the
position, even if an election protest is filed. Unless the electoral tribunal issues a ruling
invalidating Pedro’s proclamation or a court orders his suspension, he can validly
discharge his functions as congressman.
POWERS OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
1. AUTHORITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
The authority of public officers consists of the powers which are:
a) Expressly conferred upon him by the appointing authority
b) Expressly annexed to the office by law
c) Attached to the office by common law as incidents to it

Under the doctrine of necessary implication, all powers necessary for the
effective exercise of the express powers are deemed impliedly granted.
2. MINISTERIAL VS DISCRETIONARY
1. Ministerial – the discharge of which by the officer concerned is
imperative and requires neither judgment nor discretion

2. Discretionary – imposed by law upon a public officer wherein the officer

has the right to decide how and when the duty shall be performed
DUTIES OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
 ACCOUNTABILITY

Public office is a public trust. Under Article XI, Section 1 of the 1987
Philippine Constitution, public officers are accountable to the people and
must serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and
efficiency. They must act with patriotism and justice and lead modest lives.

CONSTITUTIONAL DUTIES
 UPHOLDING THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS

Public officers are sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution and
faithfully discharge their duties, as mandated by their oath of office.

CONSTITUTIONAL DUTIES
 PROMOTION OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Under Article XIII of the Constitution, public officers, especially those in

governance and social institutions, are tasked to promote social justice and
ensure respect for human rights.

CONSTITUTIONAL DUTIES
 CONFLICT OF INTEREST AVOIDANCE

Public officers are required to disclose their assets, liabilities, and net
worth annually under the law (Sec 17 Art XI). They must also avoid conflicts
of interest in their actions and decisions.

CONSTITUTIONAL DUTIES
 HONESTY AND INTEGRITY IN PUBLIC SERVICE

Article XI emphasizes the importance of honesty and integrity. Public

officers must avoid graft, corruption, and abuse of authority.

CONSTITUTIONAL DUTIES