DOJ Opinion No. 142, s. 1993

DOJ OPINION NO. 142 , s. 1993 October 18, 1993 Commissioner Liwayway Vinzons-Chato Bureau of Internal Revenue Quezon City M a d a m : This refers to your request for clarification of this Department's Opinion No. 82, s. 1993 (on the matter of that Bureau's proposed streamlining) particularly on the portion thereof which reads as follows: "However, it is noted that the proposed Executive Order would not merely effect 'organizational changes' in particular units or offices within the Bureau of Internal Revenue but would in fact reorganize or restructure its entire organizational set-up which, we believe is already a legislative matter, the power to reorganize offices being essentially a legislative function (de La Llana vs. Alba, 112 SCRA 249). . . ." It is your view that the proposed streamlining of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) "which consists only of the rearrangement, reassignments and consolidation of organizational units does not require any legislation." In support thereof, you invoke the following: 1. the residual powers of the President under Section 20, Book III of E.O. No. 292 (Administrative Code of 1987), by virtue of which, you state, the President exercises not only those powers enumerated in E.O. No. 292 but also other executive functions provided for in other laws; 2. the continuing authority of the President to reorganize his office under Section 31, Chapter 10, Book III of the same E.O. No. 292, which, as viewed by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM), "does not limit his [the President's] authority over the other departments/offices within the Executive Branch"; and 3. that the proposed streamlining of the BIR "will not result in any dislocation of existing personnel nor in the diminutions of rank and compensation and shall take into account pertinent Civil Service law and rules." At the outset, we wish to point out that Opinion No. 82, s. 1993, subject hereof, does not rule out entirely the feasibility of pushing through with the proposed streamlining of the BIR for as long as proper consultations with the DBM on this matter are effected. This is quite clear from the said Opinion, the pertinent portion of which is hereunder quoted as follows: "Notwithstanding the foregoing, since, as you state, the proposed reorganization of the BIR will be pursued in line with Memorandum Order No. 27 of the President, you are advised to consult with the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) which is the department tasked to implement the said Memorandum Order, not only with respect to the permissible organizational changes the BIR could undertake thereunder and under pertinent laws, but more so in regard to the technical details involved in the implementation proposal would inevitably have budgetary implications; hence, the need to consult the DBM on said matter." Since the DBM, which is the agency tasked to implement restructuring/reorganization proposals of government agencies, has in its Memorandum for the President dated September 15, 1993, favorably endorsed the said proposed streamlining of the BIR for the President's consideration based on its opinion that "it is technically valid and is in conformity with the [its] 'enlightened' interpretation of the powers of the President [under Sections 48 and 62 of R.A. No. 7645, Section 63 of E.O. No. 127, and Section 31, Chapter 10, Book III, E.O. No. 292] to reorganize the internal structure of agencies in the executive branch of government", we defer to the DBM's position as we acknowledge its technical competence and expertise on the subject. Our statement in that portion of Opinion No. 82, s. 1993 upon which you seek clarification, intimating legislative approval for your streamlining proposals assumes that there would be abolition of offices which would result in the removal of incumbents and/or creating of new positions which would entail new or additional appropriations. For indeed, any reorganization proposal which involves either or both of these matters (i.e. abolition of offices resulting in removal of incumbents or creation of new positions requiring new appropriations) would have to pass through Congress, unless there is a law expressly delegating such powers to the President. In your request for clarification, however, you made it clear that the proposed streamlining of the BIR "will not result in any dislocation of existing personnel nor in the diminution of rank and compensation and shall take into account pertinent civil service law and rules", which implies that there will be no removal of incumbents in violation of the security of tenure clause. Likewise, it is noted that the funding for the implementation of the proposal will be taken from funds available in the Bureau of Internal Revenue (Sec. 2, proposed Executive Order), which means that there will be no new appropriation of funds from the National Treasury which can only be done through a law passed by Congress. Based on these assumed facts, we agree with the position of DBM that the proposed streamlining of the BIR may be effected through executive action pursuant to existing laws. LLpr Very truly yours, (SGD.) FRANKLIN M. DRILON Secretary