Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments | LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

IX. LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

H. Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments

This topic focuses on two specific bodies within the Legislative Department of the Philippines: the Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments (CA). These are special constitutional bodies that ensure the integrity of elections and the proper appointment of public officials. Each plays a unique role in the legislative process, and they have distinct powers and procedures.

---

1. Electoral Tribunals

A. Constitutional Basis

The creation of the Electoral Tribunals is mandated by Article VI, Section 17 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. These tribunals are tasked with the exclusive authority to resolve election contests involving members of Congress, i.e., the Senate and the House of Representatives.

There are two distinct tribunals:

• Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET) – for election contests involving the Senate.
• House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) – for election contests involving the House of Representatives.

B. Composition

Both tribunals follow a similar structure, consisting of:

• Nine members:
  • Three Justices of the Supreme Court, designated by the Chief Justice.
  • Six members from the respective chamber of Congress (Senators for the SET, and Representatives for the HRET), chosen based on proportional representation of the political parties or blocs in the respective chamber.

The Justices serve as neutral members, while the legislators represent their political affiliations. The Chairman of the tribunal is always one of the Justices.

C. Jurisdiction

The Electoral Tribunals have exclusive jurisdiction over the following matters:

1. Election contests involving the qualifications, returns, and the proper proclamation of a member of the Senate (SET) or House of Representatives (HRET).

   • Election contests refer to any action or protest filed by a candidate questioning the validity of the election of a member, usually concerning allegations of fraud, misconduct, or other irregularities during the election process.

2. Qualifications of Members of Congress:

   • The tribunals are empowered to rule on whether a sitting member meets the qualifications for membership, as enumerated in the Constitution (e.g., citizenship, age, residency).

D. Procedure

1. Filing of Petition: Any aggrieved party (usually an opposing candidate) may file an election protest or petition to question the election of a member of Congress.

2. Election Protest: Involves a detailed investigation and reexamination of the contested election, including the possible recount of votes or review of electoral procedures.

3. Finality of Decision: The decisions of the Electoral Tribunals are final and executory. They are not subject to appeal to any other court, including the Supreme Court, except on very limited grounds such as jurisdictional overreach.

---

2. Commission on Appointments (CA)

A. Constitutional Basis

The Commission on Appointments is a constitutional body created under Article VI, Section 18 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Its role is to confirm or reject certain appointments made by the President of the Philippines, ensuring a system of checks and balances between the executive and legislative branches.

B. Composition

The CA is composed of 25 members, who include:

• The Senate President as the ex officio Chairman.
• Twelve Senators.
• Twelve Members of the House of Representatives.

The members of the Commission are elected based on proportional representation from the political parties or coalitions represented in both houses of Congress. Members of the CA hold office until their legislative term expires.

C. Jurisdiction and Powers

The Commission on Appointments has the authority to confirm or reject the following presidential appointments:

1. Cabinet Members:

   • All heads of executive departments (e.g., Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Secretary of Justice, etc.) require confirmation by the CA.

2. Ambassadors, Public Ministers, and Consuls:

   • The CA reviews and confirms appointments of ambassadors and other diplomatic representatives of the country.

3. Officers of the Armed Forces from the rank of Colonel or Naval Captain and higher:

   • Senior military officers require confirmation by the CA before they can assume their positions.

4. Heads of Constitutional Commissions:

   • Chairpersons and Commissioners of constitutional bodies such as the Commission on Elections (COMELEC), Commission on Audit (COA), and Civil Service Commission (CSC) need CA confirmation.

5. Other Officers as may be required by law:

   • This includes other positions where the law expressly requires CA confirmation.

D. Procedure

1. Appointment by the President: The President submits a list of nominees to the Commission on Appointments.

2. Committee Hearings: The CA’s respective committees hold public hearings to vet the nominees. These hearings involve:

   • A review of the qualifications and experience of the nominee.
   • Questions regarding the nominee’s competence, integrity, and suitability for the office.

3. Plenary Voting: After the committee hearing, the CA votes in plenary session on whether to confirm or reject the appointment. A majority vote of all members present is required to approve or reject the nomination.

4. Discretionary Powers: The Commission on Appointments has considerable discretion in confirming or rejecting appointments. The power to confirm or reject does not require the CA to give reasons, and its decisions are generally not subject to judicial review.

E. Limitations

The CA’s powers are limited by the Constitution:

1. Midnight Appointments: Under Article VII, Section 15, the President is prohibited from making appointments two months before the next presidential election and until the end of their term, except temporary appointments to executive positions when continued vacancies could prejudice public service.

2. Ad Interim Appointments: During recess of Congress, the President may make temporary or ad interim appointments, but such appointments shall only be effective until the Commission on Appointments disapproves them or until the next adjournment of Congress.

---

Summary and Legal Implications

1. Electoral Tribunals (SET and HRET) ensure the legitimacy of the election of members of Congress, with exclusive jurisdiction over election contests.
2. Commission on Appointments provides a check on the President’s power of appointment, ensuring that certain key appointments are subject to the approval of Congress.

Both of these bodies play crucial roles in upholding the constitutional principles of checks and balances, ensuring the integrity of the electoral process, and maintaining the proper functioning of government through careful scrutiny of appointments.

Powers | Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments | LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments: Powers under the Legislative Department

A. Electoral Tribunals

Electoral Tribunals are bodies established by the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines to resolve disputes involving the election, returns, and qualifications of members of Congress. Specifically, the Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET) for Senators and the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) for members of the House of Representatives. These tribunals are vested with exclusive jurisdiction over electoral contests relating to their respective chambers.

1. Constitutional Basis

• Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET) and House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) are created under Article VI, Section 17 of the 1987 Constitution.

  • Section 17: The Senate and the House of Representatives shall each have an Electoral Tribunal which shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of their respective members.
  • Each tribunal is composed of nine members: three from the Supreme Court, designated by the Chief Justice, and six from the Senate or the House of Representatives, as the case may be, chosen based on proportional representation from the political parties and party-list organizations.

2. Powers and Functions of the Electoral Tribunals

• Exclusive Jurisdiction: The Electoral Tribunals have the exclusive authority to hear and decide electoral contests concerning members of the Senate and the House of Representatives. No other entity can assume jurisdiction over these matters.

  • Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET): Exercises exclusive jurisdiction over all contests related to the election, returns, and qualifications of Senators.
  • House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET): Exercises exclusive jurisdiction over all contests related to the election, returns, and qualifications of members of the House of Representatives.

• Judicial Function: The Tribunals function in a quasi-judicial capacity. They are independent of the legislative functions of Congress and act as quasi-judicial bodies that review evidence and legal arguments.

• Scope of Authority:

  • The tribunals can inquire into the qualifications of candidates, such as citizenship, age, residency, and other eligibility requirements under the Constitution.
  • They review issues concerning the election process, including fraud, vote-buying, and errors in the counting and canvassing of votes.
  • Proclamation Disputes: They can invalidate the proclamation of a winning candidate if evidence shows irregularities.

• Decisions: The decisions of the Electoral Tribunals are final and executory. These decisions are generally not appealable, except in cases of grave abuse of discretion, which may be subject to review by certiorari by the Supreme Court under its expanded judicial power (Article VIII, Section 1 of the Constitution).

3. Composition and Process

• Three Justices of the Supreme Court, designated by the Chief Justice, and six members of the Senate or the House, selected based on proportional representation.

• Impartiality: The tribunal members must act impartially, even though a majority are from the legislative body. A balance is maintained by the presence of justices from the Supreme Court.

• Quorum and Decision: A majority of the members of the Electoral Tribunal constitutes a quorum for its meetings, and decisions are rendered by a majority vote of all its members.

---

B. Commission on Appointments

The Commission on Appointments (CA) is a constitutional body vested with the power to confirm certain appointments made by the President of the Philippines. It acts as a check on the executive branch by ensuring that presidential appointments meet the requirements of competence, integrity, and fitness for office.

1. Constitutional Basis

• Article VI, Section 18 of the 1987 Constitution provides for the creation of the Commission on Appointments.

  • Section 18: The Commission on Appointments consists of the President of the Senate, as ex officio chairman, and twelve Senators and twelve members of the House of Representatives, elected by each House on the basis of proportional representation from the political parties or organizations therein. The Chairman of the Commission shall vote only in case of a tie.

2. Powers and Functions of the Commission on Appointments

• Power of Confirmation: The primary power of the CA is to approve or disapprove certain appointments made by the President. The positions requiring confirmation include:

  • Heads of executive departments (i.e., Cabinet members).
  • Ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls.
  • Officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain.
  • Heads of government-owned or controlled corporations (GOCCs) or their subsidiaries, as provided by law.

• Appointments that Do Not Require Confirmation: The following appointments do not require confirmation by the CA:

  • The Vice President (when appointed to a Cabinet position).
  • Judges and justices (whose appointments are under the purview of the Judicial and Bar Council, Article VIII, Section 9).
  • Career officials whose promotions are based on merit and seniority, as required by law.

• Scope of Review: The CA reviews the qualifications and fitness of the appointees. This involves an assessment of the appointees' qualifications, ethical standards, track record, and integrity. Appointees must undergo confirmation hearings where they may be asked to answer questions about their background and qualifications.

• Decision-Making Process:

  • The CA votes in plenary after hearings conducted by its committees. Appointees must receive a majority vote of all the members of the CA present in the session for their appointment to be confirmed.

  • Rejection of Appointments: The CA has the power to reject an appointment. Once rejected, the President may no longer reappoint the same individual to the same position unless the CA reverses its decision.

• Voting and Powers of the Chair: The Senate President serves as the ex officio chairman of the Commission and votes only in the case of a tie.

3. Checks and Balances

• The Commission on Appointments is an essential part of the checks and balances mechanism in the Philippine government. It ensures that the executive branch does not have unchecked power over appointments and that only qualified and competent individuals are appointed to sensitive positions in the government.

4. Confirmation Process

• The Commission exercises its power through its committees, each of which handles specific categories of appointments (e.g., foreign affairs, defense, etc.). Appointees appear before these committees for public hearings, during which members of the Commission may question them about their qualifications and fitness for the position.

5. Decisions and Appeals

• The decisions of the CA, like those of the Electoral Tribunals, are final and binding. Once the CA confirms or rejects an appointment, the decision is effective immediately. There is no higher authority to appeal CA decisions on confirmations.

C. Interrelationship and Key Jurisprudence

• The Supreme Court has consistently upheld the independence of both the Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments as essential mechanisms of checks and balances.

• The Electoral Tribunals are considered quasi-judicial bodies, and their decisions can only be reviewed by the Supreme Court under the narrow ground of grave abuse of discretion (e.g., Cayetano v. Monsod and Francisco v. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal).

• The Commission on Appointments, on the other hand, is a political body, and its decisions, especially on the rejection of appointments, are generally considered political questions and are not subject to judicial review.

D. Conclusion

Both the Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments play critical roles in the Philippine constitutional system. They serve as independent entities that ensure the proper functioning of the democratic processes related to elections and appointments in government. These bodies safeguard against abuses of power and uphold the constitutional principles of checks and balances.

Nature | Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments | LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

Nature of Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments

I. Electoral Tribunals

The Constitution of the Philippines establishes the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) and the Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET) as independent constitutional bodies tasked with the resolution of electoral contests involving members of Congress.

A. Constitutional Basis

1. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET)

   • Established under Article VI, Section 17 of the 1987 Constitution.
   • Composition: Nine members, consisting of three Justices of the Supreme Court designated by the Chief Justice, and six members of the House of Representatives chosen based on proportional representation from the political parties or groups.

2. Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET)

   • Established under Article VI, Section 17 of the 1987 Constitution.
   • Composition: Nine members, consisting of three Justices of the Supreme Court designated by the Chief Justice, and six Senators chosen based on proportional representation from the political parties or groups.

B. Nature and Jurisdiction

1. Jurisdiction Over Electoral Contests

   • The Electoral Tribunals (HRET and SET) have exclusive jurisdiction over all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, respectively.
   • Jurisdiction begins once a member has been proclaimed, taken their oath of office, and assumed their position. This exclusive jurisdiction means that no other body, including the Commission on Elections (COMELEC), courts, or even Congress itself, may resolve electoral contests involving members of Congress.

2. Quasi-Judicial Function

   • The Electoral Tribunals exercise a quasi-judicial function. Although created as part of the legislative branch, they perform adjudicatory functions similar to those of the judiciary.
   • The tribunals have the power to issue decisions that are binding, final, and executory, subject only to review by the Supreme Court on grounds of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction (Rule 65 of the Rules of Court).

3. Independence

   • The HRET and SET are designed to be independent of the respective houses they serve to avoid bias and ensure impartiality in resolving electoral contests. Their decisions must be free from any interference by the legislative body.
   • Although members of the Senate and the House of Representatives form part of the tribunals, the balance between legislators and Justices of the Supreme Court ensures impartiality, with judicial members often expected to lead in the determination of legal and procedural issues.

C. Procedure in Electoral Tribunals

1. Petition

   • An election contest is initiated by filing a petition contesting the election, returns, and qualifications of a member of Congress. The petition must allege specific grounds such as fraud, irregularities in the counting or canvassing, ineligibility of the proclaimed winner, or other electoral violations.

2. Decision-Making Process

   • Decisions are rendered by a majority vote of all the members of the tribunal.
   • The proceedings are conducted in a judicial manner, observing due process and procedural rules that are similar to those followed in court litigation.

3. Finality and Review

   • Decisions of the Electoral Tribunals are final and executory, subject to review only by the Supreme Court through a special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, which is a limited review based on grave abuse of discretion.

II. Commission on Appointments

A. Constitutional Basis

The Commission on Appointments (CA) is a constitutional body created under Article VI, Section 18 of the 1987 Constitution. It serves as a check on the appointing power of the President, particularly for high-level executive, military, and diplomatic positions.

B. Composition

1. The Commission on Appointments is composed of 12 Senators and 12 Members of the House of Representatives, elected on the basis of proportional representation from political parties and groups. The Senate President is the ex officio Chairman of the CA but does not vote except in cases of a tie.
2. The CA is a bicameral body in nature, as it draws members from both houses of Congress, and its composition is determined by political representation within each chamber.

C. Nature and Functions

1. Confirmatory Power

   • The CA exercises a confirmatory power over certain appointments made by the President. This power ensures that appointments to high-ranking positions undergo legislative scrutiny, promoting checks and balances between the executive and legislative branches of government.

2. Scope of Appointments Subject to Confirmation

   • The following appointments by the President are subject to the confirmation of the CA:

     • Heads of executive departments (e.g., Secretaries of National Defense, Foreign Affairs, Finance).
     • Ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls.
     • Officers of the Armed Forces of the Philippines from the rank of colonel or naval captain, and higher.
     • Other officers whose appointments are vested in the President by law and are not otherwise provided for by the Constitution.

   • The appointment of judges of the Supreme Court, the Ombudsman, and the heads of constitutional commissions (e.g., Commission on Audit, Civil Service Commission, COMELEC) are not subject to CA confirmation, as these are specifically exempted by the Constitution and are subject to direct appointment by the President.

3. Quasi-Legislative Function

   • The CA exercises a quasi-legislative function, involving the exercise of discretion in approving or rejecting presidential appointments. The CA does not create laws but functions as a legislative body ensuring that appointments conform to public interest, qualifications, and the national good.

4. Independence

   • The CA is meant to be an independent body, distinct from the control of the executive branch. It operates to scrutinize appointees impartially, though it is composed of members of Congress who may belong to the same party as the President.

5. Non-Judicial in Character

   • Unlike the Electoral Tribunals, the CA does not perform a judicial or quasi-judicial function. Its role is to approve or reject appointments based on political and legal considerations, without adjudicating disputes or making binding legal rulings.

D. Procedure in the Commission on Appointments

1. Nomination and Confirmation

   • Upon the nomination of an appointee by the President, the CA conducts public hearings where the nominee is subject to questioning by members of the commission. The nominee’s qualifications, integrity, and competence are scrutinized.
   • After deliberations, the CA either approves or rejects the nomination through a vote.

2. Majority Vote

   • A majority of the members present during a session is needed to approve an appointment. A quorum (majority of all the members) must be present for the CA to conduct its proceedings.

3. Rejection of Appointments

   • If the CA rejects an appointment, the President may appoint another nominee or make an ad interim appointment when Congress is not in session. Such ad interim appointments, however, must still be confirmed by the CA when Congress reconvenes.

4. Ad Interim Appointments

   • The President may make ad interim appointments during recesses of Congress. These appointments are effective immediately but are subject to confirmation by the CA upon the reconvening of Congress. If the CA rejects the ad interim appointee, they are automatically removed from office.

III. Distinction Between the Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments

1. Functions

   • The Electoral Tribunals perform a judicial function, specifically resolving electoral contests, while the Commission on Appointments exercises a legislative confirmatory function over certain presidential appointments.

2. Independence

   • Both bodies are constitutionally independent, but their independence is exercised in different spheres. The electoral tribunals are meant to be independent of the houses they serve to ensure impartial resolution of electoral disputes, while the CA ensures the independence of the appointment process from unchecked executive power.

3. Composition and Decision-Making

   • The Electoral Tribunals are composed of members from both Congress and the judiciary, ensuring a blend of political and judicial oversight. The CA, on the other hand, is purely a legislative body composed solely of members of Congress, focusing on legislative oversight of the executive.

In conclusion, both the Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments are crucial elements in maintaining the system of checks and balances under the 1987 Constitution. They ensure the legitimacy of elected officials and appointees to public office, safeguarding democratic processes through their distinct but complementary roles.