La Carlota City, Negros Occidental vs. Rojo

For purposes of quorum under Section 53 of the Local Government Code, the city vice-mayor, as presiding officer, is a member of the Sangguniang Panlungsod and must be counted in computing the majority of all members who have been elected and qualified. The vice-mayor’s inclusion rests on Sections 49 and 457 of RA 7160, which explicitly enumerate the vice-mayor as part of the sanggunian’s composition. The authority to break a tie vote further confirms membership; excluding the vice-mayor from the quorum count while recognizing a determinative voting power would produce an anomalous and absurd situation.

Atty. Rex G. Rojo, an incumbent member of the Sangguniang Panlungsod of La Carlota City, applied for the vacant position of Sanggunian Secretary. On 17 March 2004, during a regular session, he tendered his irrevocable resignation as a sanggunian member. The following day, 18 March 2004, then Vice-Mayor Rex R. Jalandoon appointed him to the secretary post under a permanent status. After the May 2004 local elections, the newly elected city mayor and vice-mayor challenged the legality of the appointment, asserting that the resignation had been accepted without a quorum and therefore Rojo had remained an elective official disqualified from appointment under the Constitution.

• Appointment and Prior Resignation: On 17 March 2004, Atty. Rex G. Rojo, a member of the Sangguniang Panlungsod of La Carlota City, tendered his irrevocable resignation during a regular session. On 18 March 2004, Vice-Mayor Rex R. Jalandoon appointed Rojo as Sangguniang Panlungsod Secretary under permanent status.
• Transmittal and CSC Field Office Action: The appointment was transmitted to the CSC Negros Occidental Field Office on 19 March 2004, but the appointing papers lacked the signature of the Human Resource Management Officer and the certifications of completeness and publication. The Field Office informed the appointing authority that the appointment was considered recalled or withdrawn due to non-compliance.
• Appeal to CSC Regional Office: Jalandoon appealed to CSC Regional Office No. VI, arguing that the transmittal itself implied regularity. The Regional Office reversed the Field Office, finding that: (a) the Sangguniang Panlungsod had a total of 13 members including the vice-mayor; (b) seven members attended the 17 March 2004 session (the vice-mayor plus six regular members), constituting a quorum; (c) Rojo’s resignation was therefore validly accepted under Section 82(d) of RA 7160; (d) the appointment complied with publication, Personnel Selection Board deliberation, and funding certifications; and (e) the appointment date, 18 March 2004, fell outside the election ban (26 March to 9 May 2004).
• Intervention by New City Officials: Following the 2004 elections, the incoming Mayor Jeffrey P. Ferrer and Vice-Mayor Demie John C. Honrado intervened. They contended that the vice-mayor should not be counted as a member for quorum purposes; thus, with only six regular members present, no quorum existed, Rojo’s resignation was void, and he remained an elective official ineligible for appointment under Section 7, Article IX-B of the Constitution. They further alleged non-compliance with civil service rules and argued that the appeal should have been brought by Rojo, not the former vice-mayor.
• CSC and CA Rulings: The CSC dismissed the appeal on the ground that the intervenors were not the appointing authority, but nonetheless echoed the regional office’s substantive findings. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the vice-mayor is included in quorum calculation, that Rojo possessed the required qualifications, and that the appointment substantially complied with civil service requirements.
• Petition before the Supreme Court: Petitioners maintained that Rojo’s resignation was invalid for lack of quorum and that his subsequent appointment breached the constitutional bar on appointive eligibility of elective officials. Respondent countered that the vice-mayor is a member under the LGC and that a valid quorum existed.

• Constitutional Ineligibility: Petitioners argued that without counting the vice-mayor, only six out of twelve regular sanggunian members were present on 17 March 2004, falling short of the seven-member majority required for a quorum. Under Section 82 of RA 7160, an irrevocable resignation is effective only upon presentation before a session with a quorum. Because no quorum existed, Rojo’s resignation was invalid, he remained an incumbent elective official, and his appointment as secretary contravened the absolute prohibition in Section 7, Article IX-B of the Constitution against appointing elective officials during their tenure.
• Violation of Civil Service Rules: Petitioners maintained that the absence of the Human Resource Management Officer’s signature and the required certifications rendered the appointment fatally defective under civil service laws and regulations.

• Quorum Includes the Vice-Mayor: Respondent invoked Section 457 of the Local Government Code, which lists the vice-mayor as a component of the sanggunian, and DILG Opinion No. 28, s. 2000, to argue that the vice-mayor is a member for quorum purposes. With the vice-mayor and six other members present, the seven members constituted a majority of the thirteen-member body, satisfying the quorum requirement. The irrevocable resignation was therefore validly accepted.
• Validity of Appointment: Respondent asserted that he met all the qualifications for Sanggunian Secretary under Section 469(b) of the LGC, being a lawyer and a first-grade civil service eligible. The refusal of the Human Resource Management Officer to sign could not defeat a valid appointment because such inaction would subordinate the appointing authority to the arbitrary will of a subordinate performing a ministerial function.

• Quorum and Validity of Resignation: Whether the vice-mayor, as presiding officer, should be counted as a member of the Sangguniang Panlungsod for purposes of determining a quorum under Section 53 of the Local Government Code, and whether respondent’s irrevocable resignation was validly accepted.
• Constitutional Proscription on Appointment: Whether respondent’s appointment as Sangguniang Panlungsod Secretary violated the constitutional prohibition in Section 7, Article IX-B of the 1987 Constitution against the appointment of elective officials during their tenure.
• Compliance with Civil Service Rules: Whether respondent’s appointment was issued contrary to existing civil service rules and regulations due to the absence of required certifications and signatures.

• Quorum and Validity of Resignation: The vice-mayor is a member of the Sangguniang Panlungsod for quorum computation. Section 457 of RA 7160 explicitly states that the sanggunian “shall be composed of the city vice-mayor as presiding officer, the regular sanggunian members, … and the sectoral representatives, as members.” The phrase “composed of” means “formed of” or “consisting of,” making the vice-mayor an integral part of the body. Section 49 reinforces membership by granting the vice-mayor a tie-breaking vote; excluding him from the quorum count while recognizing that decisive vote would produce an absurdity. The Senate deliberations on the Local Government Code confirm the legislators’ intent to treat the vice-mayor as a member, in contrast to the pre-1991 scheme where the mayor presided but was not a member. The ruling in Zamora v. Caballero, which required the entire membership — including the Vice-Governor — to be counted for quorum, applies squarely. The contrary ruling in Perez v. Dela Cruz was decided under a different statutory regime that did not define the vice-mayor as a member; RA 7160 has since expressly classified the vice-mayor as part of the sanggunian’s composition. Thus, the 13-member Sangguniang Panlungsod required at least seven members for a quorum. With the vice-mayor and six other members present on 17 March 2004, a quorum existed, and Rojo’s irrevocable resignation was validly accepted under Section 82(d).
• Constitutional Proscription on Appointment: Because the resignation was validly accepted on 17 March 2004, Rojo ceased to be an elective official before his appointment on 18 March 2004. Section 7, Article IX-B of the Constitution bars the appointment of an elective official “during his tenure.” That prohibition did not apply to Rojo at the time of his appointment, as he was no longer an incumbent sanggunian member.
• Compliance with Civil Service Rules: Substantial compliance with civil service requirements was shown. The vacancy was published, the Personnel Selection Board deliberated on Rojo’s qualifications, and certifications of available appropriations and funds were issued. The refusal of the Human Resource Management Officer to sign the appointment papers — a ministerial act — could not defeat an otherwise valid appointment. The appointment, issued on 18 March 2004, fell outside the election ban (26 March to 9 May 2004).

• Vice-Mayor as Member of the Sanggunian for Quorum Purposes: Under Sections 49 and 457 of the Local Government Code, the city vice-mayor, in the capacity of presiding officer, is a member of the Sangguniang Panlungsod and must be included in determining a quorum under Section 53. The total membership is the sum of the vice-mayor, all regular members, and ex-officio members. A majority of that total — a number greater than half — constitutes a quorum.
• Entire Membership Rule (Zamora v. Caballero): The phrase “majority of all the members of the sanggunian who have been elected and qualified” in Section 53 requires that the entire membership be taken into account. The principle, originally applied to regular members on leave, extends to the inclusion of the presiding officer as part of the whole.
• Distinction from Perez v. Dela Cruz: The pre-LGC ruling that a vice-mayor is not a member of the municipal board unless expressly made so does not apply under RA 7160, which explicitly lists the vice-mayor as part of the sanggunian’s composition and confers a tie-breaking vote that signifies membership.
• Irrevocable Resignation of Sanggunian Members (Section 82(d)): An irrevocable resignation by a sanggunian member is deemed accepted upon presentation before an open session of the sanggunian concerned and due entry in its records. The validity of the acceptance presupposes the existence of a quorum during that session.
• Ministerial Duty Cannot Defeat Appointment: The appointing power cannot be held hostage by the refusal or neglect of a subordinate officer to perform a ministerial duty, such as signing certifications required for attestation.

• “RA 7160 clearly states that the Sangguniang Panlungsod ‘shall be composed of the city vice-mayor as presiding officer, the regular sanggunian members, … and the sectoral representatives, as members.’ … Clearly, the vice-mayor, as presiding officer, is a ‘member’ of the Sangguniang Panlungsod considering that he is mandated under Section 49 of RA 7160 to vote to break a tie. To construe otherwise would create an anomalous and absurd situation where the presiding officer who votes to break a tie during a Sanggunian session is not considered a ‘member’ of the Sanggunian.”
• “A sanggunian is a collegial body. … The acts of only a part of the Sanggunian done outside the parameters of the legal provisions aforementioned are legally infirm, highly questionable and are, more importantly, null and void.” (quoting Zamora v. Caballero)
• “[I]t would be tantamount to putting the appointing power under the mercy of a department head who may without reason refuse to perform a ministerial function.”

• Zamora v. Governor Caballero, 464 Phil. 471 (2004): Followed. The Court relied on this case for the proposition that the entire membership of a sanggunian — including the presiding officer — must be counted in computing a quorum. The principle was extended to the Sangguniang Panlungsod.
• Perez v. Hon. Dela Cruz, 137 Phil. 393 (1969): Distinguished. The ruling that a vice-mayor is not a member of the municipal board was issued under a different legal framework (RA 305 and RA 2259) that did not expressly designate the vice-mayor as a member. Under the present Local Government Code, the vice-mayor is unequivocally part of the sanggunian’s composition.

• Section 7, Article IX-B, 1987 Constitution: “No elective official shall be eligible for appointment or designation in any capacity to any public office or position during his tenure.” Applied; respondent was no longer an elective official when appointed, as his resignation had been validly accepted.
• Section 3, Article X, 1987 Constitution: Mandates Congress to enact a local government code that provides for the powers, functions, and duties of local officials. Invoked to establish that the Local Government Code is the controlling law on the vice-mayor’s status.
• Section 49, RA 7160 (Local Government Code): Designates the city vice-mayor as presiding officer of the Sangguniang Panlungsod and grants a tie-breaking vote. Used to support the conclusion that the vice-mayor is a member, as the voting power is inconsistent with mere officership.
• Section 53, RA 7160: Defines quorum as “a majority of all the members of the sanggunian who have been elected and qualified.” Interpreted to include the vice-mayor in the total membership count.
• Section 82(d), RA 7160: Provides that irrevocable resignations by sanggunian members are deemed accepted upon presentation before an open session and entry in the records. Applied to uphold the validity of respondent’s resignation.
• Section 457, RA 7160: Enumerates the composition of the Sangguniang Panlungsod as “the city vice-mayor as presiding officer, the regular sanggunian members, … and the sectoral representatives, as members.” This text was central to the holding that the vice-mayor is a member for quorum purposes.
• Section 469(b), RA 7160: Prescribes the minimum qualifications for a Sanggunian Secretary. Respondent was found to possess these qualifications.
• Section 9(h), Article V, Presidential Decree No. 807 (Civil Service Decree): Empowers the Civil Service Commission to approve or disapprove appointments based on the appointee’s eligibility and qualifications. The CSC’s approval was upheld.

Chief Justice Renato C. Corona, Justices Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr., Teresita J. Leonardo-De Castro, Arturo D. Brion (who wrote a separate concurring opinion emphasizing that the vice-mayor is counted for quorum only, without conferring full membership rights where specific voting requirements render quorum irrelevant), Diosdado M. Peralta, Lucas P. Bersamin, Roberto A. Abad, Martin S. Villarama, Jr., Jose Portugal Perez, Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno, Jose C. Mendoza, Bienvenido L. Reyes, and Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe.

• Justice Mariano C. Del Castillo: The dissent maintained that the vice-mayor is not a member of the sanggunian for quorum purposes. Section 457 qualifies the vice-mayor only “as presiding officer” while the rest are “as members”; the power to break a tie does not ipso jure confer membership. Reliance on Perez v. Dela Cruz was correct because RA 7160, like the earlier statutes, does not expressly state that the presiding officer is a member. Counting the vice-mayor for quorum, despite his inability to vote on most matters, contradicts the function of a quorum — to ensure the presence of members capable of transacting business. The dissent further warned that granting the vice-mayor legislative membership would erode checks and balances when the vice-mayor later exercises executive functions, such as mayoral veto powers.