G.R. No. 116763 . April 19, 1996.
GOVERNOR RODOLFO C. FARIÑAS and AL NACINO, petitioners, vs. MAYOR ANGELO N. BARBA, VICE MAYOR MANUEL S. HERNANDO and EDWARD PALAFOX, respondents.

FACTS

A permanent vacancy arose in the Sangguniang Bayan of San Nicolas, Ilocos Norte, due to the resignation of member Carlito B. Domingo, who did not belong to any political party. To fill the vacancy, Mayor Angelo Barba recommended the appointment of Edward Palafox to Governor Rodolfo Fariñas. The Sangguniang Bayan also passed a resolution recommending Palafox’s appointment to the Mayor. The Sangguniang Panlalawigan, however, disapproved this resolution, asserting that the appointing authority was the Provincial Governor, and instead recommended Al Nacino to the Governor.
Consequently, on June 8, 1994, Governor Fariñas appointed petitioner Al Nacino. On the same day, Mayor Barba appointed respondent Edward Palafox. Petitioners Fariñas and Nacino subsequently filed a petition for quo warranto and prohibition. The Regional Trial Court upheld Mayor Barba’s appointment of Palafox, ruling that for vacancies caused by a member without party affiliation, the Municipal Mayor, as the Local Chief Executive, is the appointing authority upon recommendation of the concerned Sanggunian.

ISSUE

Who has the authority to appoint a replacement for a permanent vacancy in a Sangguniang Bayan caused by the cessation from office of a member who does not belong to any political party, and what is the proper procedure?

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled that the Provincial Governor is the proper appointing authority, but the appointment is valid only if made upon the prior recommendation of the Sangguniang Bayan where the vacancy exists. The legal logic is derived from a systematic interpretation of Section 45 of the Local Government Code ( R.A. No. 7160 ). Paragraph (a)(2) of Section 45 generally vests in the Governor the power to appoint members of the Sangguniang Bayan. Paragraph (b) provides that for members with political party affiliation, the appointment must be made from a nominee of the same political party, with such nomination being a condition sine qua non.
For a member without party affiliation, there is no political party to nominate. By analogy, the recommendation of the Sanggunian concerned substitutes for the party nomination and becomes an indispensable requirement to complete the appointing process. Therefore, the Governor’s appointing power under Section 45(a)(2) is constrained by the mandatory need for a recommendation from the Sangguniang Bayan, just as it would be constrained by a party nomination under Section 45(b). In this case, neither appointment was valid. Nacino’s appointment by the Governor lacked the required recommendation from the Sangguniang Bayan. Palafox’s appointment, while recommended by the Sangguniang Bayan, was invalidly issued by the Mayor, who is not the appointing authority for such vacancies. The Court affirmed the dismissal of the petition but on these different legal grounds.