b. Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency

Power of Control and Supervision

• Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency
• Executive Departments and Offices
• Local Government Units (LGU)

1987 CONST., art. VII, sec. 17

> ARTICLE VII Executive Department SECTION 17. The President shall have control of all the executive departments, bureaus, and offices. He shall ensure that the laws be faithfully executed.

> ARTICLE X

Local Government General Provisions SECTION 4. The President of the Philippines shall exercise general supervision over local governments. Provinces with respect to component cities and municipalities, and cities and municipalities with respect to component barangays shall ensure that the acts of their component units are within the scope of their prescribed powers and functions.

Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency

QUALIFIED POLITICAL AGENCY - Acts of department heads, etc., performed and promulgated in the regular course of business, are presumptively acts of the President.

Application to Cabinet Members and Executive Secretary (LEONEN)

The doctrine of qualified political agency acknowledges the multifarious executive responsibilities that demand a president's attention, such that the delegation of control power to his or her Cabinet becomes a necessity.

Unless the Constitution or law provides otherwise, Cabinet members have the president's imprimatur to exercise control over the offices and departments under their respective jurisdictions, which authority nonetheless remains subject to the president's disapproval or reversal. In a long line of decisions, the Court upheld the notion that "the power of the president to reorganize the National Government may validly be delegated to his [or her] cabinet members exercising control over a particular executive department”.

But the Court retains the distinction that the doctrine remains limited to the President's executive secretary and other Cabinet secretaries. It does not extend to deputy executive secretaries or assistant deputy secretaries. Clearly, the president cannot be expected to personally exercise his or her control powers all at the same time. This entails the delegation of power to his or her Cabinet members (Philippine Institute for Development Studies v. Commission on Audit, GR. No. 212022, Aug. 20, 2019).

Exceptions to the rule prohibiting executive officials from holding additional positions

• President

The President can assume any or all Cabinet posts because the departments are mere extensions of his personality, according to the Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency. Hence, no objection can be validly raised based on Section 13, Article VII.

The President can assume ex officio positions (e.g. The President is the Chairman of NEDA) [Section 9, Article XII, 1987 Constitution].

• Vice-President: The Vice-President may be appointed as a member of the Cabinet. Such appointment requires no confirmation [Section 3, Article VII, 1987 Constitution].
• Cabinet

The Constitution allows a Cabinet member to hold another office provided:

• It is in an ex-officio capacity and without additional compensation;
• Such is necessitated by the primary functions of his position (e.g. Secretary of Trade and Industry as Chairman of NDC; Secretary of Agrarian Reform as Chairman of the Land Bank); and
• Such is allowed by law [Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary, supra].

Note: Section 7, Article IX-B is the general rule for appointed officials. It is not an exception to Section 13, Article VII, which is a specific rule for members of the Cabinet, their deputies and assistants inter alia [See Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary, supra].

De facto officer doctrine: In cases where there is no de jure officer, a de facto officer, who in good faith has had possession of the office and has discharged the duties pertaining thereto, is legally entitled to the emoluments of the office, and may in an appropriate action to recover the salary, fees and other compensations attached to the office [Funa v. Agra, G.R. No. 191644 (2013)].

A de facto officer’s acts are presumed valid and binding as to the public and third parties [Funa v. Agra, G.R. No. 191644, Feb. 19, 2013].