G.R. No. L-11336; August 30, 1958
RODOLFO GANZON, petitioner-appellant, vs. UNION C. KAYANAN, respondent-appellee.

FACTS

On August 25, 1956, Ernesto V. Rosales filed a verified administrative complaint with the President of the Philippines against Rodolfo Ganzon, the incumbent Mayor of Iloilo City. The complaint contained three counts: (1) that on August 22, 1956, the Mayor, using his position and accompanied by armed guards, stormed a radio station (DYRI) to stop a “People’s Forum” interview program, constituting oppression/grave misconduct; (2) that during the incident, he personally pushed microphones and hit the complainant on the neck, constituting oppression and misconduct; and (3) that he hurled invectives at the complainant, constituting oppression and conduct unbecoming an official. The complaint prayed for an investigation and the Mayor’s immediate suspension pending investigation.
On September 13, 1956, the Executive Secretary, by authority of the President, designated Union C. Kayanan to conduct the investigation pursuant to Section 64(c) of the Revised Administrative Code. The investigation was set for September 25-26, 1956. On September 24, 1956, Mayor Ganzon filed an action for prohibition with preliminary injunction in the Court of First Instance of Iloilo, questioning the President’s authority to order his investigation and seeking to enjoin Kayanan from proceeding. The lower court declined to issue a preliminary injunction, set the case for hearing, and after the parties admitted the facts in the pleadings, rendered a decision on October 2, 1956, dismissing the petition. Ganzon’s motion for reconsideration was denied, prompting this appeal.

ISSUE

Whether the President of the Philippines has the power and authority under the Constitution and existing laws to investigate the mayor of a chartered city (Iloilo City) and take disciplinary action against him if found guilty.

RULING

Yes, the President has the authority. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s decision.
The charter of Iloilo City ( Commonwealth Act No. 158 , as amended) provides that the mayor “shall hold office for six years unless removed” but does not specify the removal procedure. The Court held that a definite tenure implies removal can only be for cause, not at the President’s pleasure.
The President’s authority over local officials is derived from Section 64(b) and (c) of the Revised Administrative Code, in connection with Article VII, Section 10(1) of the Constitution. These provisions grant the President the power to remove officials “conformably to law” and to order investigations of any person in the government service when required by the public good.
Although the Iloilo City charter is silent on removal causes, the Court applied the principle from Lacson v. Roque that the rights and duties of city officials may be regulated by provisions of general application in the same code. The Court found the position of a city mayor comparable in category to a provincial governor. By analogy, a city mayor is therefore amenable to removal for the same causes specified for provincial governors under Section 2078 of the Revised Administrative Code, namely: disloyalty, dishonesty, oppression, and misconduct in office.
The acts alleged in the complaint—using his official position to commit acts of violence and intimidation to suppress a radio program and the right to free speech—constitute “misconduct in office.” Therefore, the President acted within his authority in ordering the investigation of Mayor Ganzon.
The decision of the lower court was affirmed, with costs against the appellant.