More from omeroscar
More iReports you should see
Phl court sacks 5 Gloria appointees
The Court of Appeals on Friday affirmed the legality of President Benigno Aquino’s executive order dismissing five of the six “midnight appointees” made by former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
In five separate decisions, the appellate court’s former 8th division revoked the midnight appointments of five Arroyo appointees, who were all dismissed after Aquino issued Executive Order No. 2.
“The Constitution imposes a prohibition on the part of the President to make midnight appointments because during the transition period, he is no more than a mere ‘care taker’ who must not do anything that would undermine the policies of the succeeding President,” said the decision penned by Associate Justice Noel Tijam.
“The purpose is also to eradicate the possible abuse of Presidential prerogatives of appointment for partisan purposes thereby preventing the incoming President from choosing the persons whom he sees fit to aid him in promoting his policies and running his administration,” the ruling further said.
The Constitution bars the President from making appointments in government two months before the presidential elections and up to the end of the Chief Executive’s term except for “temporary appointments to executive positions when continued vacancies therein will prejudice public service or endanger public safety.”
The ruling dismissed the petitions filed by Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority Board member Eddie Tamondong, State Solicitor Cheloy Garafil, Philippine National Railways General Manager Manuel Andal, Quezon City Prosecutor Dindo Venturanza, and Ngayong Pilipino Foundation Commissioner and Executive Director Charito Planas, whose appointments were terminated by EO No. 2.
On the other hand, the court granted the petition filed by Office of Muslim Affairs chief Bai Omera Lucman, noting that she was appointed on March 8, 2010, three days before the start of the appointments ban on March 11, 2010, or two months before the May 2010 presidential elections.
The Court of Appeals ordered that Lucman be reinstated to serve the remainder of her term. She is also entitled to her salaries and other benefits that she should have received during the period she was removed from office.
The six petitions against the EO were originally filed before the Supreme Court, but the high court remanded them to the appellate court for hearings and presentation of evidence.
In five separate decisions, the appellate court’s former 8th division revoked the midnight appointments of five Arroyo appointees, who were all dismissed after Aquino issued Executive Order No. 2.
“The Constitution imposes a prohibition on the part of the President to make midnight appointments because during the transition period, he is no more than a mere ‘care taker’ who must not do anything that would undermine the policies of the succeeding President,” said the decision penned by Associate Justice Noel Tijam.
“The purpose is also to eradicate the possible abuse of Presidential prerogatives of appointment for partisan purposes thereby preventing the incoming President from choosing the persons whom he sees fit to aid him in promoting his policies and running his administration,” the ruling further said.
The Constitution bars the President from making appointments in government two months before the presidential elections and up to the end of the Chief Executive’s term except for “temporary appointments to executive positions when continued vacancies therein will prejudice public service or endanger public safety.”
The ruling dismissed the petitions filed by Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority Board member Eddie Tamondong, State Solicitor Cheloy Garafil, Philippine National Railways General Manager Manuel Andal, Quezon City Prosecutor Dindo Venturanza, and Ngayong Pilipino Foundation Commissioner and Executive Director Charito Planas, whose appointments were terminated by EO No. 2.
On the other hand, the court granted the petition filed by Office of Muslim Affairs chief Bai Omera Lucman, noting that she was appointed on March 8, 2010, three days before the start of the appointments ban on March 11, 2010, or two months before the May 2010 presidential elections.
The Court of Appeals ordered that Lucman be reinstated to serve the remainder of her term. She is also entitled to her salaries and other benefits that she should have received during the period she was removed from office.
The six petitions against the EO were originally filed before the Supreme Court, but the high court remanded them to the appellate court for hearings and presentation of evidence.
- TAGS:
- breaking_news
What do you think of this story?
Select one of the options below. Your feedback will help tell CNN producers what to do with this iReport. If you'd like, you can explain your choice in the comments below.
Be and editor! Choose an option below:
iReport welcomes a lively discussion, so comments on iReports are not pre-screened before they post. See the iReport community guidelines for details about content that is not welcome on iReport.
© 2013 Cable News Network. 
Comments