Sheet1Article IX: Constitutional Commissions

A. Common ProvisionsFrom the immortal words of Vince Carter, iz over, iz done.

Section 1. Independent CommissionsMacalintal v. COMELEC, GR 157013, July 10, 2003Ombudsman v. Civil Service Commission, GR No. 159940, February 16, 2005

Section 2. Prohibition on Members

Section 3. Salary

Section 4. Power to Appoint

Section 5. Fiscal AutonomyCSC v. DBM, 482 SCRA 233

Section 6. Promulgation of RulesMacalintal v. COMELEC, GR No. 157013, July 10, 2003Sabili v. COMELEC, GR 193261, April 24, 2012

Section 7. Decisions of the Commissions

Review of final orders, resolutions and decisions:1. Rendered in the exercise of quasi-judicial functions2. Rendered in the exercise of administrative functions

Filipinas Engineering and Machine Shop v. Ferrer, 135 SCRA 25Saligumba v. CA, 117 SCRA 669PTTC v. COA, 146 SCRA 190 (1986)Cua v. COMELEC, 156 SCRA 582 (1987)Estrella v. COMELEC, GR No. 160465, May 27, 2004Mison v. COA, 187 SCRA 445 (1990)Paredes v. COMELEC, 127 SCRA 653 (1984)Ambil v. COMELEC, 344 SCRA 358 [2000]Mateo v. CA, GR No. 113219, August 14, 1995Reyes v. Regional Trial Court, GR No. 108886, May 5, 1995ABS-CBN v. COMELEC, 323 SCRA 611Salva v. Makalintal, GR 132603, September 18, 2000Garces v. CA, GR. No. 114 795, July 17, 1996Dumayas v. COMELEC, GR Nos. 141952-53, April 29, 2001Aguilar v. COMELEC, GR No. 185140, June 30, 2009Cayetano v. COMELEC, GR 193846, April 12, 2011Dela Llana v. The Chairperson, COA, GR 180989, February 7, 2012Cagas v. COMELEC, 663 SCRA 644 (2012)

Section 8. Other Functions

B. Civil Service Commission

Section 1. Composition; Qualifications; TermGaminde v. COA 347 SCRA 655 (2000)Mathay Jr. v. CA, GR No. 124374, December 15, 1999

Section 2.Scope of the systemCuevas v. Bacal, GR 139382, December 6 2000

Under Civil Service LawPARAGRAPH 1MWSS v. Hernandez 143 SCRA 602 [1986]NSC v. NLRC 168 SCRA 122UP v. Regino 221 SCRA 598 [1993]Mateo v. CA 247 SCRA 284 [1995]DOH v. NLRC 251 SCRA 700 [1995]Juco v. NLRC 277 SCRA 528 [1997]Feliciano v. Gison 629 SCRA 103 [2010]Var

GOCCs Under the Corporation CodeBLISS v. Calejo 237 SCRA 271 [1994]Postigo v. Philippine Tuberculosis society 479 SCRA 628LRTA v. Venus 485 SCRA 301

PARAGRAPH 2Classifications and AppointmentsPlease give the definition of each class and differentiateHIGC v. CSC 220 SCRA 148 [1993]Mauna v. CSC 232 SCRA 388 [1994]Rimonte v. CSC 244 SCRA 498 [1995]Gloria v. De Guzman 249 SCRA 126 [1995]Atty. Ellas Omar A Sana v. Career Executive Service Board, GR 192926, 15 November 2011Var

CompetitiveSamson v. CA 145 SCRA 654[1986]

Non-CompetitiveAstraquillo v. Mangalupas 190 SCRA 280 [1990]Office of the President v. Buenaobra 501 SCRA 302Var

Policy-Determining

Primarily ConfidentialBorres v. CA 153 SCRA 120 [1987]Grino v. CSC 194 SCRA 458 [1991]Santos v. Macaraig 208 SCRA 74 [1992]Hilario v. CSC 243 SCRA 206 [1995]Rosete v. CA 264 SCRA 147 [1996]CSC v. Salas 274 SCRA 414 [1997]Acahacoso v. Macaraig 195 SCRA 235 [1991]Felix v. Buenaseda 240 SCRA 139 [1995] (par.2)Pamantasan ng Maynila v. CSC 241 SCRA 503 [1995]Province of the Camarines Sur v. CA 246 SCRA 231 [1995]PEZA v. Mercado 614 SCRA 683 [2010]VarCSC v. CA 635 SCRA 749 [2010]Var

PermanentLuego v. CSC 143 SCRA 327 [1986]Pangilinan v. Maglaya 225 SCRA 511 [1993] (par.2)

ReorganizationSantiago v. CSC 178 SCRA 733 [1989]Montecillo v. Civil Service Commission, GR NO. 131954. June 28, 2001Gatmaitan v. Gonzales 492 SCRA 591Nieves v. Blanco 673 SCRA 638 [2012]Var

Appointment vs. designationBinamira v. Garucho 188 SCRA 154 [1990] (par.2) (designation by Dept. Sec.)

Removal for Cause/Security of TenureCause for Removal: PARAGRAPH 3

1. Loss confidenceHernandez v. Villegas 14 SCRA 544 [1965]

2. Abolition of OfficeBriones v. Osmena 104 PHIL. 588 [1958]Eugene v. CSC 243 SCRA 196 [1995]

3. ReorganizationRomualdez-Yap v. CSC 225 SCRA 285 [1993]Fernandez v. Sto Tomas 242 SCRA 192 [1995]Chato v. Natividad 244 SCRA 787 [1995]Divinagracia v. Sto. Tomas 244 SCRA 595 [1995] (par.3)Vinzon-Chato v. Zenarosa, GR 120539, October 20, 2000De Guzman v. Comelec, GR 129118, July 19, 2000Cuevas v. Bacal, GR 139382, December 6, 2000

4. Qualification for EligibilityMayor v. Macaraig 194 SCRA 672 [1991

5. Abandonment; Acceptance of Incompatible/Other EmploymentCanonizado v. Aguirre, 323 SCRA 312 [2001]Salvador v. CA, GR 127501, May 5, 2000

Due Process in RemovalEnrique v. CA 229 SCRA 180 [1994]CSC v. Magnaye 619 SCRA 347 [2010]Rubenecia v. CSC 244 SCRA 640 [1995]VarPhilippine Charity Sweepstakes Office Board Of Directors v. Marie Jean C. Lapid, GR 191940, 12 April 2011Var

Security of TenureChua v. CSC 206 SCRA 65 [1992]NLTD v. CSC 221 SCRA 145Cabagnot v. CSC 223 SCRA 59 (Marohombsar v. CA, GR 126481, February 18, 2000Ong v. OP 664 SCRA 413 [2012]Megan

Electioneering or Partisan Political ActivitySantos v. Yatco 106 PHIL 21People v. De Venecia 14 SCRA 864 [1965]

Right to Self-Organization and Right to StrikeSSS Employees v. CA 175 SCRA 686 [1989]Balingasan v. CA 276 SCRA 557 [1997]Jacinto v. CA 281 SCRA 557 [1997]De la Cruz v. CA 305 SCRA 303GSIS v. Kapisanan 510 SCRA 622

Temporary EmployeesGloria v. CA, GR 119903, August 15, 2000

Section 3. Purpose of a Civil Service SystemLazo v. CSC, 236 SCRA 469

Section 4. Oath or Affirmation

Section 5. Standardization of Compensation

Section 6. Prohibition of Appointment of Lame DucksPeople v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 164185, July 23, 2008Megan

Section 7. Prohibitions; Appointments; Office; EmploymentFlores v. Drilon 223 SCRA 568 (1993)In re Eduardo Escala, 653 SCRA 141MeganLa Carlota City v. Rojo , GR 181367, 24 April 2012Megan

Sec. 8 Prohibitions; Compensation; Foreign Gift/Office/TitleSedusasta v. Municipality of Surigao 72 PHIL. 482 [1941]Peralta v. Mathay 38 SCRA 296 (1971)Santos v. CA GR No. 139792, Nov. 22, 2000Cabili v. CSC, GR No. 156503, June 22, 2006Benguet State University v. Colting, GR No. 169637, June 8, 2007Herrera, et al v. NPC, GR No. 166570, December 18, 2009NEA v. CSC 611 SCRA 14 [2010]Yap v. COA 619 SCRA 154 [2010]Sergio I. Carbonilla, et al v. Board of Airlines, GR 193247Office of the President v. Board of Airlines, GR 194276, 14 September 2011MeganPEZA V. COA 675 SCRA 513[2012]MeganDimagiba v. Espartero 676 SCRA 420 [2012]Megan

C. Commission on ElectionsSkip cases but read the provisions. Provision > Cases. All day

Section 1. Composition; Qualifications; TermCayetano v. Monsod, 201 SCRA 210 (1991)Brillantes v. Yorac, 192 SCRA 358 (1990)Matibag v. Benipayo, 380 SCRA 49

Section 2. Powers and Functions

Administrative PowerAlfiado v. Comelec, GR 141787, September 18, 2000Columbres v. Comelec, GR 142038,September 18, 2000Sahali v. Comelec, GR 134169, February 2, 2000Claudio v. Comelec, GR 140560, May 4, 2000De Guzman v. Comelec, GR 129118, July 19, 2000Social Weather Station, Inc v. COMELEC, GR NO. 147571, May 5, 2001Information Technology Foundation v. Comelec, GR 159139, Jan 13, 2004Buac v. Comelec, 421 SCRA 92Capalla v. COMELEC 673 SCRA 1 [2012]

Election ContestsFlores v. COMELEC 184 SCRA 484 [1990]Galido v. COMELEC 193 SCRA 78 [1991]Mercado v. BES 243 SCRA 422 [1995]Relampagos v. Cumba 243 SCRA 690 [1995]People v. Delgado 189 SCRA 715 [1990]Garces v. CA 259 SCRA 99 [1996]Zarate v. Comelec and Lallave GR 129096, November 19, 1999Regalado v. CA, GR 115962, February 15, 2000Faelnar v. People,GR 140850-51, May 4, 2000Tan v. Comelec, GR 148575, Dec. 10, 2003Alauya v. Comelec, GR 158830, August 10, 2004

Powers Not Given

Deputizing Law Enforcement AgenciesPeople v. Basilla 179 SCRA 87[1989]

Registration of Parties and OrganizationLDP v. Comelec, GR 161265, February 24, 2004Atienza v. COMELEC 612 SCRA 761 [2010]Lokin v. COMELEC 674 SCRA 538[2012]

Prosecution of Election OffensesPeople v. Inting 187 SCRA 788 [1990]Corpus v. Tanodbayan 149 SCRA 281[1987]COMELEC v. Silva 286 SCRA 177[1998]Comelec v. Hon. Espanol, GR 149164, Dec. 10, 2003Arroyo v. DOJ 681 SCRA 181[2012]

Recommendatory Powers

Section 3. DecisionsPangilinan v. COMELEC 228 SCRA 36[1993]Sarmiento v. Comelec 212 SCRA 307[1992]Carnicosa v. COMELEC 282 SCRA 512[1997]Ramas v. COMELEC 286 SCRA 189[1998]Garvida v. Sales 271 SCRA 767[1997]Velayo v. Comelec, GR 135613, March 9, 2000Sebastian v. Comelec, GR 139573, Mach 7, 2000Soller v. Comelec, GR 139853, September 5, 2000Barroso v. Ampig et al, GR138218, March 17, 2000Maruhon v. Comelec, GR 139357, May 5,2000Balindong v. Comelec, GR 153991, Oct. 16, 2003Jaramilla v. Comelec, GR 155717, Oct. 23, 2003Bautista v. Comelec, GR 154796-97, Oct. 23, 2003De Llana v. Comelec, GR 152080, Nov. 28, 2003Repol v. Comelec, GR 151418, Apr. 28, 2004Pedragoza v. COMELEC 496 SCRA 513Cayetano v. COMELEC 479 SCRA 514Munoz v. COMELEC 495 SCRA 407Tan v. COMELEC 507 SCRA 352Enriquel v. COMELEC 613 SCRA 809Mendoza v. COMELEC 616 SCRA 443Maria Laarni L Cayetano v. Comelec, GR 193846, 12 April 2011 (also in Sec. 7, Art IX-A)

Section 4. Supervision/Regulation of Public Utilities, Media Grants, PrivilegesUnido v. COMELEC, 104 SCRA 17Sanidad v. COMELEC, 181 SCRA 529 (1990)Osmena v. COMELEC 199 SCRA 750 [1991]Philippine Press Institute v. COMELEC, GR No. 119654, May 22, 1995Telecom v. COMELEC 289 SCRA 337 [1998]ABS-CBN v. COMELEC, GR No. 133486, Jan. 28, 2000SWS v. COMELEC, GR No. 147571, May 5, 2001

Section 5. Favorable Recommendation for Pardon, Amnesty, Parole or Suspension of Sentence

Section 6. Free and Open Party SystemLiberal Party v. COMELEC, GR No. 191771, May 6, 2010

Section 7. No Block-Voting

Section 8. Prohibition on Political Parties

Section 9. Election Period

Section 10. No Harassment and Discrimination

Section 11. Funds

D. Commission of Audit

Section 1. Qualifications; TermChe Cardenas, CPA, AuditorMison v. COA, 187 SCRA 445

Section 2. General Function; Powers

Sec. 2 Powers and Functions

Examine and Audit: Government revenues and Government expendituresBlue Bar Coconut Phil. Tantuico 163 SCRA 716 [1988]DBP v. COA 231 SCRA 202 [1994]Eslao v. COA 236 SCRA 161 [1994]J.F.F. Manacop v. CA 266 SCRA 235 [1997]Polloso v. Gangan, GR 140563, July 14, 2000Uy v. COA, GR 130685, March 21, 2000Aguinaldo v. Sandiganbayan 265 SCRA 121 [1996]DBP v. COA, 422 SCRA 459 [2004]Home Development Mutual Fund v. COA, GR 142297, June 15, 2004DBP v. COA 498 SCRA 537 [2006]Nava v. Palattao 499 SCRA 745 [2006]Gualberto De Llana v. COA, GR 180989, 7 Feb. 2012Candelario L. Versoza Jr. v. Guillermo N Carague, GR 157838, 7 February 2012Philippine Coconut v. Republic 663 SCRA 514 [2012]

Audit JurisdictionCaltex v. COA 208 SCRA 726 [1992]Jose Gabriel Cabaron, Registered NurseMamaril v. Domingo 227 SCRA 206[1993]Philippine Airlines v. COA 245 SCRA 39 [1995]CIR v. COA 218 SCRA 203 [1993]CSC v. Pobre, GR 160568, Sept. 15, 2004Luciano Velos, et al. v. Commission On Audit, GR 193677,6 Sept. 20011Boy Scout of the Philippines v. COA, GR 177131, 7 June 2011Dela Llana v. COA 665 SCRA 176 [2012]Settle Government AccountPhilippine Operations, Inc. v. Auditor General, 94 Phil 868 [1953-1954]ICNA v. Republic, 21 SCRA 40 [1967]Dingcong v. Guingona, 162 SCRA 782 [1988]NHC v. COA 226 SCRA 55 [1993]Euro-Med v. Province of Batangas, 495 SCRA 30 [2006]

Define Scope and Techniques of Auditing ProceduresAlman-Najar Namla, JoblessDanville Maritime v. COA,175 SCRA 701 [1989]

Promulgate Accounting and Auditing RulesLeycano v. COA, 482 SCRA 215

Decide Administrative Cases Involving Expenditures of Public FundsNCMH v. COA, 265 SCRA 390 [1996]Ramos v. Aquino, 39 SCRA 256 [1971]Salva v. Carague, 511 SCRA 258City of Basilan v. Hechanova, 58 SCRA 711 [1974]

Section 3. COA JurisdictionLuciano Veloso v. Commisssion on Audit, GR 193677, 6 September 2011

Section 4. Annual Report to the President and to Congress

Article X. Local Government

Section 1. Territorial and Political Subdivisions of the PhilippinesJordache Ramos, Not a PerfumeCordillera Broad Coalition v. COA, GR No. 79956, January 26, 1990

Section 2. Local AutonomyLimbona v. Conte Mangelin, et al, GR No. 80391, February 28, 1989San Juan v. CSC, 196 SCRA 69 (1991)Drilon v. Lim 235 SCRA 135 [1994]Magtajas v. Pryce Properties, GR No. 111097, July 20, 1994Judge Leynes v. COA, GR No. 143596, Dec. 11, 2003Batangas CATV v. CA and Batangas City, GR No. 138810, September 29, 2004CREBA v. Secretary of DAR, GR 183409, June 18, 2010Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014

Section 3. Local Government CodeGarcia v. COMELEC, 227 SCRA 100 (1993)Malonzo v. COMELEC, 269 SCRA 380 (1997)Malonzo v. Zamora 323 SCRA 875

Section 4. Supervision by the PresidentEllorah Kate Cabato, Presently an Aunt, Future MomGanzon v. CA, 200 SCRA 271Joson v. Torres, 290 SCRA 279Drilon v. Lim, 235 SCRA 135 (1994)Bito-onon v. Fernandez 350 SCRA 732National Liga v. Paredes 439 130 [2004]SJS v. Atienza 545 SCRA 92 [2009]Province of Negros v. COA, GR No. 182574, September 28, 2010

Section 5. Taxation Power of Local GovernmentLTO v. City of Butuan, 322 SCRA 805Lina v. Pano, 364 SCRA 76 (2001)Petron v. Mayor, GR No. 158881, April 16, 2008Yamane v. BA Lepanto Condominium, GR No. 154993, October 25, 2005Philippine Petroleum v. Municipality of Pililla, GR No. 90773, June 3, 1991Acebedo Optical v. CA, GR 100152, March 21, 2000PLDT v. City of Davao, GR 143867, March 25, 2003John Hay Peoples Alternative Coalition v. Lim, GR No. 119775, October 24, 2003Manila Electric v. Province of Laguna, GR No. 131359, May 5, 1999Batangas Power v. Batangas City, GR No. 152675, April 28, 2004Smart Communications v. City of Davao, GR No. 155491, September 16, 2008

Section 6. Share in National TaxesPHY, VERY LONG NAME TOO TYPE BUT THIS AN EVEN LONGER DESCRIPTIONPimentel v. Aguirre, 336 SCRA 201 (2000)Province of Batangas v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 152774, May 27, 2004Alternative Center v. Zamora, GR No. 144256, June 8, 2005League of Cities v. COMELEC August 24, 2010

Section 7. Equitable Share in the National Wealth

Section 8. Term of Local OfficialsBorja v. COMELEC, 295 SCRA 157Lozanida v. COMELEC, GR No. 135150, July 28, 1999Adormeo v. COMELEC, GR No. 147927, February 4, 2002Socrates v. COMELEC, 391 SCRA 457 (2002)Latasa v. COMELEC, GR No. 154829, Dec. 10, 2003David v. COMELEC, 271 SCRA 90 (1997)Rivera v. COMELEC 523 SCRA 41Montebon v. COMELEC, 551 SCRA 50Ong v. Alegre, GR No. 163295, January 23, 2006Laceda v. Lumena GR 182867, November 25, 2008Dizon v. COMELEC, GR No. 182088, January 30, 2009Alboin v. COMELEC, GR No. 184836, December 23, 2009Bolos v. COMELEC 581 SCRA 786 [2009]Aldovino v. COMELEC 609 SCRA 234 [2009]Datu Michel Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, GR 196271, February 2012 (reconsideration; holdover provision in RA 9054 Unconstitutional as Congress in passing RA 10153 has made clear)

Section 9. Sectoral RepresentativesBennSupangan Jr. v. Santos, GR No. 84662, August 24, 1990

Section 10. Creation, Abolition, Change of BoundariesTan v. COMELEC, 142 SCRA 727 (1986)Tobias v. Abalos 239 SCRA 106 [1994] (metes and bounds)Mun. of Jimenez v. Judge Baz 265 SCRA 182 [1996](de jure corporation)Cawaling v. COMELEC GR146319, October 26, 2001League of Cities of the Philippines v. COMELEC, GR 176951, Nov. 29, 2008Sema v. COMELEC, 558 SCRA 700Camid v. Office of the President, GR No. 161414, January 17, 2005Navarro v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 180050, February 10, 2010

Section 11. Metropolitan Political SubdivisionsMMDA v. Bel-Air Village Association Assoc., GR No. 135962, March 27, 2000MMDA v. Garin, GR No. 130230, April 15, 2005Gancayco v. City Government of Quezon City, 658 SCRA 853

Section 12. Highly Urbanized Cities, Component CitiesAbella v. COMELEC, GR No. 100710, September 3, 1991

Section 13. Local Government Units Grouping Themselves

Section 14. Regional Development Councils and Other Similar BodiesPimentel v. Ochoa 676 SCRA 551 [2012]

Sec. 15 Purpose, and how many Autonomous Regions

Section 15. Autonomous RegionsKhalil with Alman. Just BecauseDisomangcop v. Sec. of DPWH,GR 149848, Nov. 25, 2004Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, GR No. 196271, October 18, 2011

Section 16. General Supervision of the PresidentAmpatuan v. Hon Ronaldo Puno, GR 190259. 17 June 2011 (Proclamation 1946 and AOs and 273 A do not violate the principle of local autonomy under Section 16, Article X of the Constitution, and Section 1 Article V of the Expanded ARMM Organic Act)Kulayan v. Tan 675 SCRA 482 [2012]

Section 17. Powers Not Vested to the ARMMDatu Michel Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, GR 196271, 18 October 2011. (The framers decided to reinstate the provision in order to make it clear, once and for all, that these are the limits of the powers to the autonomous government; those not enumerated are actually to be exercised by the national government; the autonomy granted to the ARMM cannot be invoked to defeat national policies and concerns Since the synchronization of elections not just a regional concerns but a national one, the ARMM is subject to it; the regional autonomy granted to the ARMM cannot be used to exempt the region from having act in accordance with national policy mandated by no less than the Constitution)

Sections 18 and19. Organic Act for Autonomous RegionsAbbas v. COMELEC, 179 SCRA 287 (1989)Ordillos v. COMELEC, 192 SCRA 100 (1990)Badua v. CBA, 194 SCRA 101 (1991)Atitiw v. Zamora, 471 SCRA 329Cordillera Broad Coalition v. COA, GR No. 82217, Jan. 29, 1990Pandi v. CA, GR No. 116850, April 11, 2002Sema v. COMELEC, GR No. 177597, July 16, 2008Province of North Cotabato v. GRP PanelDatu Michael Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, February 2012 (means that only amendments to, or revisions of, the organic Act Constitutionally-essential to creation of autonomous regions i.e. , those aspects specially mentioned in the Constitution which Congress must provide for the Organic Act require ratification through a plebiscite)

Section 20. Legislative Powers of the Autonomous RegionsProvince of North Cotabato v. Government of the Philippines Peace Panel, 568 SCRA 492

Section 21. Preservation of Peace and Order

Article XI. Accountability of Public Officers

Section 1. Public OfficeHipolito v. Mergas 195 SCRA 6 [1991]Bornasal, Jr. v. Montes 280 SCRA 181 [1997]Almario v. Resus AM NO. P941076, [November 22, 1999]Juan v. People, GR 132378, January 18, 2000Re; AWOL of Antonio Makalintal, AM 99-11-06-SC, February 15, 2000Estrella v. Sandiganbayan, GR 125160, June 20, 2000Malbas v. Blanco, A.M P99-1350, December 12, 2001Manaois v. Lemeo, AM MTJ-03-1492, Aug. 26, 2003Re; Gideon Alibang, AM 2003-11-SC June 15, 2004ABAKADA v. Purisima 562 SCRA 251[2008]Salumbides v. OMB, GR 180917, April 23, 2010

Section 2. Officers Subject to Removal by ImpeachmentOmbudsman v. CA 452 SCRA 714 [2005] (exclusive list)

Section 3. Procedure for ImpeachmentIn re Gonzales, 160 SCRA 771 (1988)Marcoleta v. Brawner 582 SCRA 474 [2009])Romulo v. Yniguez, 141 SCRA 260 (1986)Francisco v. House of Representatives, 415 SCRA 44Estrada v. Desierto, 353 SCRA 452 (2001); MR, 356 SCRA 108 (2001)Gutierrez v. Committee on Justice, 643 SCRA 198

Section 4. SandiganbayanNunez v. Sandiganbayan 111 SCRA 433 [1982] (creation of Sandiganbayan)Lecaros v. Sandiganbayan 128 SCRA 324 [1984] (crimes in relation to public office)Cunanan v. Arceo 242 SCRA 88 [1995] (averment of the nature of the crime committed)Balmadrid v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 58327, March 22, 1991Azarcon v. Sandiganbanyan, GR No. 116033, February 26, 1997Binay v. Sandiganbayan GR NO. 120681-83 [October 1, 1999]Mayor Layus v. Sandiganbayan GR 134272, December 8, 1999Abbot v. Mapayo, GR 134102, July 6, 2000Defensor-Santiago v. Sandiganbayan, 356 SCRA 636 (2001)

Section 5. OmbudsmanBaluyot v. Holganza, GR 136374, February 2000Garcia v. Ombudsman, GR 127710, February 16, 2000Lapid v. CA, GR 142261, June 29, 2000Tirol v. COA, GR 133954, August 3, 2000Mamburao v. Desierto, 429 SCRA 76Carandang v. Desierto, 639 SCRA 293Lacson v. ES, 649 SCRA 142People v. Morales, 649 SCRA 182Quarto v. Marcelo, 658 SCRA 580

Section 6. AppointmentsOmbudsman v. CSC, GR No. 162215, July 20, 2007

Section 7. Tanodbayan as Special ProsecutorQuimpo v. Tanodbayan 146 SCRA 137 [1986]Zaldivar v. Sandiganbayan, 160 SCRA 843 (1988)Acop v. Ombudsman, GR No. 120422, September 27, 1995Deloso v. Domingo, 191 SCRA 545Almonte v. Vasquez, GR No. 95367, May 22, 1995Azarcon v. Guerrero, GR No. 121017, Feb 17, 1997Azarcon v. Guerrero , GR No. 116033, Feb 26, 1997Camanag v. Hon Guerrero 286 SCRA 473 [1997]Buenasada v. Flavier, 226 SCRA 645Macalino v. Sandiganbayan, 376 SCRA 452BIR v. Ombudsman, GR No. 115103, April 11, 2002Laurel v. Desierto, GR No. 145368, April 12, 2002Office of the Ombudsman v. Valera 471 SCRA 715 [2005]Perez v. Sandiganbayan 503 SCRA 252Calingin v. Desierto 529 SCRA 720 [2007]Lazatin v. Desierto 588 SCRA 285 [2009]

Section 8. Qualifications

Section 9. Appointments

Section 10. Rank

Section 11. Term

Section 12. Prompt Action on ComplaintsLaurel v. Desierto, GR No. 145368, April 12, 2002Almonte v. Vasquez, 244 SCRA 286 (1995)Uy v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 105965, March 20, 2001Raro v. Sandiganbayan, GR 108431, July 14, 2000Bautista v. Sandiganbayan, GR 136082, May 12, 2000Roxas v. Vasquez, GR NO. 114944, June 19, 2001Kara-an v. Ombudsman, GR 119990, June 21, 2004People v. Sandiganbayan 451 SCRA 413 [2005]Laxina v. Ombudsman 471 SCRA 542 [2005]Gemma P. Cabalit v. Commission On Audit-Region VII, Gr 180236, 17 January 2012 (power of the Ombudsman to determine and impose administrative liability is mandatory)Gonzales III v. OP 679 SCRA 614 [2012]

Section 13. Powers; Functions; Duties

In GeneralCruz v. Sandiganbayan 194 SCRA 474 [1991]Maceda v. Vasquez 221 SCRA 464 [1993]Macalino v. Sandiganbayan 376 SCRA 452Garcia v. Miro, GR No. 148944, Feb 5, 2003Honasan II v. Panel of Investigating Prosecutors GR No. 159747, April 13, 2004Samson v. OMB, GR 117741, Sept 29, 2004Corpuz v. Sandiganbayan, GR 162214, Nov. 11, 2004Khan, Jr. v. Ombudsman, GR No. 125296, July 20, 2006Ombudsman v. Estandarte, GR No. 168670, April 13, 2007Ombudsman v. Lucero, November 24, 2006Ombudsman v. CA, GR No. 169079, July 17, 2007Sangguniang Barangay v. Punong Barangay, GR No. 170626, March 3, 2008Perez v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 166062, September 26, 2006Buencamino v. CA, GR No. 175895, April 4, 2007Medina v. COA, GR No. 176478, February 4, 2008Villas Nor v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 180700, March 4, 2008Ombudsman v. Rodriguez, GR No. 172700, July 23, 2010OMB v. Estendarte 521 SCRA 155 [2007]Salvador v. Mapa 539 SCRA 34 [2000]OMB v. Masing 542 SCRA 253 [2008]Medina v. COA 543 SCRA 684[2008]Borja v. People 553 SCRA 250 [2008]

Preventive Suspension and Imposition of PenaltiesBuennaseda v. Favier 226 SCRA 645 [1993](when to suspension)Hagad v. Gozo-Dadole 251 SCRA 243 [1995] (nature)Vasquez v. Hobilla-Alinio 271 SCRA 67 [1997] (not in relation to duties)OMB v. CA 491 SCRA 92OMB v. Madriaga 503 SCRA 631OMB v. CA 507 SCRA 593Estorja v. Ranada 492 SCRA 652OMB v. Lucero 508 SCRA 593Balbastro v. Junio 527 SCRA 680 [2007]OMB v. CA 527 SCRA 798 [2007]COA v. CA 529 SCRA 245 [2007OMB v. Santiago 533 SCRA 305 [2007]Govenciong v. CA 550 SCRA 502 [2008]Marohomsalic v. Cole 547 SCRA 98OMB v. Lisondra 548 SCRA 83Miro v. Abugan 549 SCRA 34Cesa v. OMB 553 SCRA 357OMB v. De Sahagun 562 SCRA 122OMB v. Samaniego 564 SCRA 502Boncalon v. OMB GR 171812, December 24, 2008OMB v. Beltran 588 SCRA 574 [2009]OMB v. Apolonio, GR 165132, 07 March 2012 (power to directly impose administrative penalties, including removal from office)

Jurisdiction over Criminal CasesNatividad v. Felix 229 SCRA 680 [1994] (amount)Lastimosa v. Vasquez 243 SCRA 497 [1995] (prosecutors assistance)Presidential v. desierto 528 SCRA 20 [2007]

Fact-finding distinguished from Preliminary InvestigationRaro v. Sandiganbayan, GR 108431, July 14, 2000Serapio v. Sandiganbayan, GR 148468, Jan 28, 2003

Section 14. Fiscal Autonomy

Section 15. Right to Recover Properties Unlawfully AcquiredHeirs of Gregorio Licaros v. SB, GR 157438, October 18, 2004Presidential Ad Hoc Fact-finding Committee on Behest Loans v. OMB Desierto, GR 135715, 13 April 2011. (reiterating Presidential Ad Hoc Fact-Finding Committee on Behest Loans v. Desierto, GR 130140; provision applies only to civil actions for recovery of ill-gotten wealth, and not to criminal cases)

Section 16. Loan, Guaranty or Other Form of Financial Accommodation

Section 17. Declaration of Assets and Liabilities

Section 18. Allegiance of Public OfficersCaasi v. CA, 191 SCRA 229 (1990)Sampayan v. Daza 213 SCRA 807 (1992)

&A

Page &P