PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT OF CAMARINES NORTE v.

GONZALES  R Beatriz Gonzales was appointed as the provincial administrator of the

Security of Tenure – RA 6656| July 23, 2013 | G.R. No. 185740 | Brion, J. Province of Camarines Norte by then Gov. Roy Padilla, Jr. on April 1,
1991. Her appointment was on a permanent capacity. On March 8,
GROUP: Group No. 2 1999, the new Gov. Jess B. Pimentel sent R a memorandum directing
DIGEST MAKER: Escalante her to explain in writing why no administrative charges should be filed
SUMMARY: R Beatriz Gonzales was appointed as the provincial administrator against her for gross insubordination/gross discourtesy in the course of
of the Province of Camarines Norte on a permanent capacity, prior to RA official duties, and conduct grossly prejudicial to the best interest of the
7160’s enactment. 8 years later, R was dismissed for gross service.
insubordination/gross discourtesy in the course of official duties, and conduct  After R submitted her comment, an Ad Hoc Investigation Committee
grossly prejudicial to the best interest of the service. The CSC ordered her found her guilty of the charges against her, and recommended to Gov.
reinstatement after she had served her 6-month suspension. The then Pimentel that she be held administratively liable. Gov. Pimentel adopted
governer reinstated R as provincial administrator, but terminated her services the Ad Hoc Investigation Committee’s recommendation and dismissed
the next day for lack of confidence, on the basis that RA 7160 had converted R.
the position into a highly confidential, coterminous position. R was not  R appealed to the CSC. The CSC modified the decision by suspending
reinstated despite the CSC’s orders. R for 6 months. MR denied. Claiming that she had already served her 6-
The SC held that Congress had reclassified the provincial administrator month suspension, R asked to be reinstated. The CSC issued a
position as a primarily confidential, non-career position, which does not violate Resolution directing such reinstatement.
R’s security of tenure. Hence, R’s termination for lack of confidence was  Gov. Pimentel reinstated R as provincial administrator, but terminated
lawful, without prejudice to her entitlement to retirement benefits, leave her services the next day for lack of confidence. He then wrote a letter to
credits, and future employment in government service. the CSC reporting his compliance with its order, and R’s subsequent
DOCTRINE: dismissal as a confidential employee.
There is a difference between the nature of the position v. an employee’s right  The CSC again directed R’s reinstatement, clarifying that while the LGC
to hold a position. The nature of a position may change by law according to made the provincial administrator position coterminous and highly
the dictates of Congress. The right to hold a position, on the other hand, is a confidential in nature, this conversion cannot operate to prejudice
right that enjoys constitutional and statutory guarantee, but may itself change officials who were already issued permanent appointments as
according to the nature of the position. administrators prior to the LGC’s effectivity.
 Congress can change the qualifications for and shorten the term of o As a permanent appointee, R may only be removed for cause,
existing statutory offices. When done in good faith, these acts would not after due notice and hearing. Loss of trust and confidence is not
violate a public officer’s security of tenure, even if they result in his among the grounds for a permanent appointee’s dismissal or
removal from office or the shortening of his term. discipline under existing laws.
 GOOD FAITH: So long as they are aimed at the office and not at the  5 years after this, R wrote the CSC alleging that the incumbent governor,
incumbent. Gov. Typoco, refused to reinstate her. The CSC again issued a
Security of tenure in public office simply means that a public officer or Resolution ordering R’s reinstatement.
employee shall not be suspended or dismissed except for cause, as provided  P, through Gov. Typoco, appealed before the CA, which upheld the
by law and after due process. It cannot be expanded to grant a right to public CSC’s ruling. MR denied. Hence, this petition for review.
office despite a change in the nature of the office held.
ISSUE/S & RATIO:
 The concept of security of tenure, varies for primarily confidential
1. WON Congress has re-classified the provincial administrator position
employees due to the basic concept of a “primarily confidential” position.
from a career service to a primarily confidential, non-career service
Serving at the confidence of the appointing authority, the primarily
position – YES.
confidential employee’s term of office expires when the appointing
authority loses trust in the employee. When this happens, the confidential P argues: The provincial administrator position has been converted into a highly
employee is not “removed” or “dismissed” from office; his term merely confidential, coterminous position by RA 7160. Hence, R no longer enjoyed
“expires” and the loss of trust and confidence is the “just cause” provided security of tenure to the position she held prior to RA 7160’s enactment.
by law that results in the termination of employment. R argues: The post remained a career service position pursuant to PD 807. This
classification, established by law and jurisprudence, cannot be altered by the
FACTS:
IRR of RA 7160. Assuming arguendo that the provincial administrator position
has indeed become a primarily confidential position, this reclassification should
not apply retroactively to her appointment on a permanent capacity prior to RA offices which provide for special immunity as regards salary and tenure,
7160’s effectivity. no one can be said to have any vested right in an office.
CONGRESS HAS RECLASSIFIED THE PROVINCIAL ADMINISTRATOR o The rule is that offices in government, except those created by
POSITION AS A PRIMARILY CONFIDENTIAL, NON-CAREER POSITION. the constitution, may be abolished, altered, or created anytime
 To emphasize the close relations that the provincial administrators’ by statute. And any issues on the classification for a position in
functions have with the office of the governor, RA 7160 even made the government may be brought to and determined by the courts.
provincial administrator position coterminous with its appointing  EO 503, which provided certain safeguards against the termination of
authority. government employees affected by the implementation of RA 7160,
 This provision, along with the interrelations between the provincial does not grant R security of tenure. It does not apply to employees of
administrator and governor under Section 480, renders clear the intent the local government affected by RA 7160’s enactment.
of Congress to make the provincial administrator position primarily o A reading of EO 503’s whereas clauses confirms that it applies
confidential under the non-career service category of the civil service. only to national government employees whose functions are to
THE RECLASSIFICATION DOES NOT VIOLATE R’S SECURITY OF TENURE. be devolved to local governments.
 There is a difference between the nature of the position v. an o The existence of the provincial administrator position was a
employee’s right to hold a position. The nature of a position may prerogative of the Sanggunian Panlalawigan, and was not even
change by law according to the dictates of Congress. The right to hold a mandatory public office under the old LGC. It is clearly not a
a position, on the other hand, is a right that enjoys constitutional and national government position whose functions are to be
statutory guarantee, but may itself change according to the nature of the devolved to the local governments.
position. o The phrase “and for other related purposes” can only add to EO
o Congress can change the qualifications for and shorten the term 503 matters related to the devolution of personnel, basic
of existing statutory offices. When done in good faith, these acts services and facilities to local government units. The impact of
would not violate a public officer’s security of tenure, even if they the change in a local government position’s nature is clearly
result in his removal from office or the shortening of his term. different from the implementation of devolution and its ancillary
o GOOD FAITH: So long as they are aimed at the office and not at effects: the former involves a change in a local government
the incumbent. position’s functions and concept of tenure, while the latter
involves (among other things) the transfer of national
IN THIS CASE: government employees to local government units.
 Congress, through RA 7160, did not abolish the provincial administrator  The dissenting opinion’s interpretation would result in the judicial
position but significantly modified many of its aspects. It is now a recognition of an act of the Executive usurping a legislative power.
primarily confidential position under the non-career service tranche of
the civil service. This change could not have been aimed at prejudicing
R, as she was not the only provincial administrator incumbent at the time 2. WON R has security of tenure over her position as provincial
RA 7160 was enacted. administrator of the Province of Camarines Norte – YES, but only as a
Focusing on the arguments raised by the dissent: primarily confidential employee. Hence, her subsequent termination,
after she was reinstated, was lawful.
 The sole and main issue in the Gabriel case cited in the dissent is
whether backwages and other monetary benefits could be awarded to  Both career and non-career service employees have a right to security
an illegally dismissed government employee, who was later ordered of tenure. All permanent officers and employees in the civil service,
reinstated. From this sentence alone can be discerned that the issues regardless of whether they belong to the career or non-career service
involved related to the consequences of illegal dismissal rather than to category, are entitled to this guaranty; they cannot be removed from
the dismissal itself. Nowhere in Gabriel was there any mention of a office except for cause provided by law and after procedural due
change in the nature of the position held by the public officer involved. process.
 It is a basic tenet in the country’s constitutional system that “public office  HOWEVER: The concept of security of tenure, varies for primarily
is a public trust,” and that there is no vested right in public office, nor an confidential employees due to the basic concept of a “primarily
absolute right to hold office. No proprietary title attaches to a public confidential” position.
office, as public service is not a property right. Excepting constitutional o Serving at the confidence of the appointing authority, the
primarily confidential employee’s term of office expires when the
 appointing authority loses trust in the employee. When this
happens, the confidential employee is not “removed” or
“dismissed” from office; his term merely “expires” and the loss of
trust and confidence is the “just cause” provided by law that
results in the termination of employment.
 Security of tenure in public office simply means that a public officer or
employee shall not be suspended or dismissed except for cause, as
provided by law and after due process. It cannot be expanded to grant a
right to public office despite a change in the nature of the office held.
IN THIS CASE:
 While the CSC might have been legally correct when it ruled that P
violated R’s right to security of tenure when she was removed without
sufficient just cause from her position, the situation had since then been
changed.
 R was reinstated as ordered, but her services were subsequently
terminated under the law prevailing at the time of the termination of her
service; i.e., she was then already occupying a position that was
primarily confidential and had to be dismissed because she no longer
enjoyed the trust and confidence of the appointing authority.
 Thus, R’s termination for lack of confidence was lawful. She could no
longer be reinstated as provincial administrator of Camarines Norte or
to any other comparable position. This conclusion, however, is without
prejudice to her entitlement to retirement benefits, leave credits, and
future employment in government service.

RULING: Decision reversed and set aside.

SEPARATE OPINIONS:
DEL CASTILLO, J., concurring and dissenting:
 Security of tenure protects the permanent appointment of a public officer,
despite subsequent changes in the nature of his position.
 EO 503 does not apply to national government employees only. The phrase
“and for related purposes” in EO 503’s title could encompass personnel not
necessarily employed by national government agencies but by local
government units such as the administrator, the legal officer and the
information officer, as enumerated in Section 2(a), paragraph 8 thereof. This
provision fills the crucial gap left by RA 7160 which did not provide whether
the term of an incumbent provincial administrator would automatically
become coterminous with that of the appointing authority upon RA 7160’s
effectivity.