4. Biraogo v. PNOY signed EO No1 establishing the Philippine Truth
Truth Commission of 2010 (PTC). Itis essentially an entity within the
Commission, Office of the President Proper and subject to his control. AD
HOC OFFICE.
G.R. No. 192935. To accomplish its task, the PTC shall have all the powers of
December 7, an investigative body the Administrative Code of 1987. It is
2010 not, however, a quasi-judicial body as it cannot adjudicate,
arbitrate, resolve, settle, or render awards in disputes
between contending parties. All it can do is gather, collect and
assess evidence of graft and corruption and make
recommendations. It may have subpoena powers but it has
no power to cite people in contempt, much less order their
arrest. Although it is a fact-finding body, it cannot determine
from such facts if probable cause exists as to warrant the filing
of an information in our courts of law. Needless to state, it
cannot impose criminal, civil or administrative penalties or
sanctions.
. Note, however, that Executive Order No. 1 is hereby declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL in this case insofar
Separation of Powers not violated.
The President’s power to conduct investigations to aid him in ensuring
the faithful execution of laws—in this case, fundamental laws on public
accountability and transparency—is inherent in the President’s powers
as the Chief Executive. That the authority of the President to conduct
investigations and to create bodies to execute this power is not explicitly
mentioned in the Constitution or in statutes does not mean that he is bereft
of such authority.
One of the recognized powers of the President granted pursuant to this
constitutionally-mandated duty is the power to create ad hoc committees.
This flows from the obvious need to ascertain facts and determine if laws
have been faithfully executed. It should be stressed that the purpose of
allowing ad hoc investigating bodies to exist is to allow an inquiry into matters
which the President is entitled to know so that he can be properly advised
and guided in the performance of his duties relative to the execution and
enforcement of the laws of the land.
as it is violative of the equal protection clause of the Constitution. A revision of the executive issuance so
as to include the earlier past administrations would allow it to pass the test of reasonableness and not be
an affront to the Constitution.