Scribd
Upload
76 views1 page

Pichay V Office of Deputy Executive

EO 13 issued by President Aquino abolished the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission and transferred its functions to the Investigative and Adjudicatory Division of the Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary for legal affairs. Finance Secretary Purisima filed a complaint against the Chairman of the board of trustees of the LWAUA and the Chairman filed for dismissal which Purisima appealed, questioning the constitutionality of EO 13. The Supreme Court ruled EO 13 constitutional as the constitution and administrative code grants the President the power to reorganize offices.

Uploaded by

memory furika
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
76 views1 page

Pichay V Office of Deputy Executive

EO 13 issued by President Aquino abolished the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission and transferred its functions to the Investigative and Adjudicatory Division of the Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary for legal affairs. Finance Secretary Purisima filed a complaint against the Chairman of the board of trustees of the LWAUA and the Chairman filed for dismissal which Purisima appealed, questioning the constitutionality of EO 13. The Supreme Court ruled EO 13 constitutional as the constitution and administrative code grants the President the power to reorganize offices.

Uploaded by

memory furika
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Pichay v.

Office of the deputy executive secretary for legal affairs, et al

GR NO. 196425

Facts:

President Aquino issued an EO abolishing the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission or PAGC transferring
its functions to the Investigative and Adjudicatory Division of the Office of the Deputy Executive
Secretary for legal affairs and that EO was number 13. That on sometime, the then-finance secretary
Purisima later on and filed a complaint against petitioner the Chairman of the board of trustees of the
LWAUA because the purchase of the shares of stocks of a certain bank. Subsequently, petitioner filed a
motion for dismissal of the same complaint on the grounds that the case was pending in the office of the
Ombudsman and that it was the only speedy remedy for such. Hence, Purisima appealed for a petition
for certiorari and prohibition thus questioning the constitutionality of the Executive Order 13.

Issue:

Is EO 13 constitutional?

Ruling:

Yes. Sc held that the constitution and the administrative code of 1987 grants the chief executive the
power to reorganize offices at his whim. Transferring of powers and the abolition of the PAGC to
Investigative and Adjudicatory Division of the Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary for legal affairs is
thus constitutional and that is justified within the power of the president.

You might also like