DOJ Opinion No. 092, s. 1989

DOJ OPINION NO. 092 , s. 1989 April 24, 1989 Hon. Jose U. Ong Commissioner of Internal Revenue East Triangle, Diliman Quezon City Sir : This refers to your request for opinion on whether or not the decisions of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue on administrative cases involving grave offenses where the penalty imposed is dismissal or removal from the service would still require prior conformity and approval of the Secretary of Finance in his capacity as Department Head pursuant to Section 37(b) of P.D. No. 807 (The Civil Service Decree of the Philippines) which provides: "Section 37. Disciplinary Jurisdiction. xxx xxx xxx (b) The heads of departments agencies and instrumentalities, provinces, cities, and municipalities shall have jurisdiction to investigate and decide matters involving disciplinary action against officers and employees under their jurisdiction. Their decisions shall be final in case the penalty imposed is suspension for not more than thirty (30) days or fine in an amount not exceeding thirty (30) days salary. In case the decision rendered by a bureau or office head is appealable to the Commission, the same shall be executory except when the penalty is removal, in which case the same shall be executory only after confirmation by the department head . (Emphasis supplied) You state that under LOI No. 204 dated July 24, 1974, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue is empowered to enforce "complete and absolute discipline among bureau officials and employees with full authority to . . . dismiss or otherwise penalize, reinstate and appoint bureau personnel and that this same authority was retained under Section 28 of Executive Order No. 127, the law mandating the reorganization of the Ministry (now Department) of Finance. prcd You further state that since Executive Order No. 127, is a later issuance that P.D. No. 807, and that the former has retained the power of the BIR Commissioner under LOI No. 204 to enforce complete and absolute discipline over erring officials and employees of that Bureau, it is your belief that decisions on their dismissals do not require prior confirmation and approval by the Secretary of Finance. LLphil It appearing that the questions propounded involve a power of your Department Head, the Secretary of Finance, to approve dismissal of BIR officials and employees from the service, we are constrained to refrain from rendering opinion thereon. Sound administrative practice and officials courtesy require that the matter be coursed through your Department Head, who may competently resolve the same without necessity of seeking the advice/legal opinion of this Office (DOJ Op. No. 121, s. 1985). Moreover, considering that resolution of your query will involve clarification/interpretation of Section 37(b) of P.D. No. 807, please be advised that the Secretary of Justice, as a matter of policy and established precedents, does not take cognizance of matters which are within the primary jurisdiction of another office or agency, in this case, the Civil Service Commission, unless upon the request of such office or agency (DOJ Op. No. 45, s. 1980; No. 194, s. 1976; and Nos. 67 and 169, s. 1969). Aside from official courtesy, the law and precedent dictate that the said office be given the opportunity to construe at first instance its own regulations, since it is most competent and best situated to do so. Besides, it is settled that the contemporaneous interpretations given by administrative agencies, much less a constitutional commission, to laws which they are duty bound to implement, deserve great weight (Pascual v. Director of Lands, 10 SCRA 854). Very truly yours, (SGD.) SEDFREY A. ORDOEZ Secretary of Justice