BarBud

2023 BAR EXAMINATIONS
POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

My Suggested Answer:

No. Hector is wrong.

In a case (San Felix v. Civil Service Commission, G.R. No. 198404, 14 October 2019, 865 Phil. 21), the Supreme Court held that although the power and authority to administer entrance and promotional examinations for police officer and senior police officer positions and consequently, investigate on the anomalies and irregularities committed during said examinations had been transferred to the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM), the Civil Service Commission (CSC), however, "as the central personnel agency," "has the original disciplinary jurisdiction over the act of [any civil servant] in order to protect the integrity of the civil service system which is an integral part of the CSC's duty, authority and power as provided in Article IX-B, Section 3 of the Constitution by removing from its roster of eligibles those who falsified their qualifications. This should be distinguished from ordinary proceedings intended to discipline a bona fide member of the system, for acts or omissions that constitute violations of the law or the rules of service. Clearly, the [NAPOLCOM] has no jurisdiction concerning matters involving the integrity of the civil service system." As such, the CSC still has jurisdiction to investigate on the veracity of the facts stated by a civil servant in his or her personal data sheet.

In this case, Hector, by conspiring with and allowing Ignacio to take, in his behalf, the Police Officer I Examination, undermines the integrity of the civil service system. Therefore, the CSC has jurisdiction to investigate the veracity of the facts stated by Hector in his personal data sheet.

2023 BAR EXAMINATIONS
POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

My Suggested Answer:

The Office of the Solicitor General is correct.

In a catena of cases, the Supreme Court ruled that "[t]he requisites of judicial review include: (1) there must be an actual case or controversy; (2) it must be ripe for adjudication; (3) the person challenging the validity of the act must have standing to sue; (4) the question of constitutionality must have been raised at the earliest opportunity; and (5) the issue of constitutionality must be the very lis mota of the case."

"[A] case to be considered ripe for adjudication, it is a prerequisite that something had been accomplished by either branch of government before a court may step in."

In this case, the Congress yet passed an amnesty law. Therefore, the issue raised by the Philippine Constitution Association is yet ripe for adjudication, i.e. the second requisite of judicial review is lacking.