Siguiente v. Justice

BENGZON, J.:

Thru this petition for mandamus and prohibition, Conrado Espinosa Siguiente prays for recognition as justice of the peace of Balimbing, Sulu, and payment of salary as such. It appears that on May 18, 1962, said petitioner took his oath as justice of the peace of the said town because, (a) in a letter submitted by President Carlos P. Garcia to the Commission on Appointments on December 26, 1961, confirmation was requested of certain ad-interim appointments extended by said President, among them an "ad-interim appointment" of herein petitioner dated May 19, 1961; and (b) such appointment was confirmed by his Commission on Appointments on May 3, 1962.

But it is uncontradicted that such appointment-the paper bearing the President's signature - was never released from Malacañan, nor delivered to petitioner.1 after December 13, 1961. Anyway, the confirmation should be regarded as a mistake because there was no such ad-interim appointment acted upon, since appointee had not up to that time qualified for the office. This was, obviously, one of the hurried or "midnight appointments", the revocation of which by Administrative Order, we refused to reverse in Aytona v. Castillo.2 President Garcia's letter to the Commission of December 26, 1961, was at most, a nomination for Espinosa Siguiente, which could be recalled by President Macapagal3 after he has ceased to be President (his term expired December 30, 1961).

For it is settled that "an officer has no right to forestall the rights and prerogatives of his successor by making a prospective appointment to fill an office, the term of which is not to begin until his own term and power have expired." - 67 C.J.S. p. 159.

( See also 42 Am. Jur, sec. 99) For the above reasons, the petition should be, and is hereby denied, with costs.

The injunction hereinabove issued, is dissolved. Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Paredes, Dizon, Regala and Makalintal, JJ., concur. Reyes, J.B.L., J., took no part.

Footnotes 1 He does not claim knowledge of it before the confirmation. In fact, he did not take his oath until May 16, 1962, when he found out that the Commission on Appointments had confirmed his "appointment". 2 L-19313, January 19, 1962.

3 ... in cases where the nomination must be confirmed before the officer can take the office or exercise any of its functions, the power of removal is not involved and nominations may be changed at the will of the executive until title to the office is vested. - McChesney vs. Sampson, 23 S.W. (2d) p.

587.