Implementation of Ombudsman Decisions Involving Municipal/City Treasurers

March 31, 2014 BLGF MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO. 017-14 TO : All Central and Regional Directors, Division Chiefs' of This Bureau, Municipal and City Treasurer and All Other Concerned SUBJECT : Implementation of Ombudsman Decisions Involving Municipal/City Treasurers For the information and guidance of all concerned, attached is a copy of letter dated 6 March 2014 of Ms. Maribeth Taytayon Padios , Assistant Ombudsman , regarding the abovementioned subject. The Central and Regional Directors, this Bureau are hereby instructed to take note of the above subject and disseminate the contents thereof to the Bureau staff and others concerned. (SGD.) SALVADOR M. DEL CASTILLO OIC-Executive Director ATTACHMENT Ombudsman @ 25 Empowering the Nation in its Unrelenting Pursuit of Good Governance March 6, 2014 Undersecretary Austere A. Panadero Department of the Interior and Local Government A. Francisco Gold Condominium II Bldg., EDSA corner Mapagmahal Street, Diliman, Quezon City Dear Undersecretary Panadero: This pertains to your letter requesting for clarification regarding the implementation of Ombudsman Decisions involving municipal/city treasurers. AHCaES There is clear legal basis to direct the implementation of Decisions involving provincial, municipal or city treasurers to the Department of Finance (DOF) or his authorized representative, specifically the Executive Director of the Bureau of Local Government and Finance (BLGF). Section 470 of the Local Government Code provides for the provisions governing treasurers in general: Sec. 470. Appointment, Qualifications, Powers and Duties. (a) The treasurer shall be appointed by the Secretary of Finance from a list of at least three (3) ranking eligible recommendees of the governor or mayor, as the case may be, subject to civil service law, rules and regulations. (b) The treasurer shall be under the administrative supervision of the governor or mayor, as the case may be, to whom he shall report regularly on the tax collection efforts in the local government unit . (emphasis and underlining supplied) The power of "supervision" that the Mayor or any local chief executive has over treasurers is only "administrative supervision," and the 1987 Administrative Code emphasizes that "administrative supervision" is limited in scope and covers only the overseeing of operations . 1 When Section 47, Book V, Title I, Subtitle A of the 1987 Administrative Code speaks of the power of heads of departments, agencies and instrumentalities, provinces and cities to discipline such power necessarily emanated from their power of appointment. Since the treasurer is not appointed by the local chief executive but by the Secretary of the Department of Finance, it necessarily follows that it is the latter, through the Executive Director of the Bureau of Local Government for Finance 2 who should implement the penalty pursuant to the principle that the power to appoint carries with it the power to discipline. This is consistent with the ruling rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Bagatsing v. Herrera : 3 The difficulty in resolving that issue lies in the dual character of Pulido's position. He was appointed by the Mayor to a position provided for in the city budget. In that sense he is a city employee. But his work is essentially judicial. He is an officer of the Manila Court of First Instance. For that reason, he should logically be under the administrative supervision of the Secretary of Justice , now this Court.* We are of the opinion that Pulido, as an executive sheriff and court liaison officer appointed by the Mayor and receiving compensation out of city funds, was a city employee subject to the Mayor's disciplinary jurisdiction. The Mayor is with the power to investigate, suspend, discipline and remove him (See secs. 11[q] and 22, Charter of Manila). Generally, the power to remove is inherent in the power to appoint (Lacson vs. Romero, 84 Phil., 740, 749) . By virtue of that power of removal, two deputy sheriffs in the Manila sheriff's office were dismissed by Mayors Villegas and Bagatsing. IEaHSD xxx xxx xxx Likewise, in the case of Macalinsag v. Chang , 4 where the Supreme Court unequivocally held that "(t)he Office of the Municipal Treasurer is unquestionably under the Department of Finance as provided for in Sec. 3, P.D. No. 477. Hence, the Secretary of Finance is the proper disciplining authority . . . ." Please be guided accordingly. Very truly yours, BY AUTHORITY OF THE HONORABLE OMBUDSMAN: (SGD.) MARIBETH TAYTAYON PADIOS Assistant Ombudsman Footnotes 1. Section 38, Chapter 7, Book IV of the 1987 Administrative Code (a) Administrative Supervision. (a) Administrative supervision which shall govern the administrative relationship between a department or its equivalent and regulatory agencies or other agencies as may be provided by law, shall be limited to the authority of the department or its equivalent to generally oversee the operations of such agencies and to ensure that they are managed effectively, efficiently and economically but without interference with day-to-day activities ; . . . (b) Such authority shall not, however, extend to (1) appointments and other personnel actions in accordance with the decentralization of personnel functions under the Code , . . . 2. The BLGF is a local government unit component of the Department of Finance created by Executive Order No. 127. 3. G.R. No. L-34952, July 25, 1975. 4. G.R. No. 96058, May 6, 1992.