29. de Leon vs. Carpio, 178 SCRA 157 (1989)

I. TITLE: De Leon vs. Carpio II. FULL TITLE: CESAR R. DE LEON, versus J. ANTONIO M. CARPIO, Director, National Bureau of Investigation, respondent. G.R. No. 85243 October 12, 1989 FRANCISCO R. ESTAVILLO versus J. ANTONIO M. CARPIO, Director, National Bureau of Investigation, respondent. G.R.No. 85442 October 12, 1989 III. TOPIC: Presidency. The act of secretary, as alter ego of the President, is also the act of the President IV. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS: The cases have been consolidated because they involve the same issue against the respondent, who has refused to reinstate the petitioners. The services of Estavillo and de Leon were terminated by then Minister of Justice Neptali Gonzales. Both appealed to the Review Committee but then advised to seek relief from the Civil Service Commission because the committee had lost jurisdiction due to the ratification of the 1987 Constitution. The CSC held that their dismissal were invalid and unconstitutional. Undersecretary of Justice Montenegro referred the order reinstating Estavillo and Undersecretary of Justice Bello III referred the order of reinstating de Leon. The reaction of the respondent was to return said orders to the CSC claiming that they were null and void for having been rendered without jurisdiction. Secretary of Justice Ordonez sent memorandum to Carpio directing him to implement the orders of reinstating the petitioners to their former positions. Instead of complying, the respondent issued a memorandum disregarding the memorandum issued by the Secretary of Justice. V. STATEMENT OF THE CASE: Estavillo and de Leon came to the Court in separate petitions for mandamus. VI. ISSUE: WON the director of the NBI can disobey an explicit and direct order issue to him by the Secretary of Justice.

VII. COURT RULING: No, the director of the NBI cannot disobey the order. The President has full control of all the memberso f his Cabinet and may appoint them as he sees fit or shuffle them at pleasure or replace them in his discretion. They are at all times under the disposition of the President as their immediate superior. The acts of the members of the Cabinet performed and promulgated in the regular course of business are, unless disapproved or reprobated by the Chief Executive, presumptively the acts of the Chief Executive. In the case at bar, Secretary Ordonez was acting in the regular discharge of his functions as an alter ego of the President. His acts should be respected by the respondent because the latter is bound to obey the Secretary’s directives, which are presumptively the acts of the President of the Philippines. VIII. DISPOSITIVE PORTION WHEREFORE, the petitions are GRANTED. The respondent is hereby ORDERED to immediately reinstate the petitioners as directed by the Secretary of Justice in implementation of the challenged orders of the Merit Systems Protection Board of the Civil Service Commission. No costs.