GR 170626; (March, 2008) (Digest)
G.R. No. 170626 ; March 3, 2008
THE SANGGUNIANG BARANGAY OF BARANGAY DON MARIANO MARCOS, MUNICIPALITY OF BAYOMBONG, PROVINCE OF NUEVA VISCAYA, ET AL., petitioners, vs. PUNONG BARANGAY SEVERINO MARTINEZ, respondent.
FACTS
The Sangguniang Barangay of Barangay Don Mariano Marcos filed an administrative complaint before the Sangguniang Bayan of Bayombong against Punong Barangay Severino Martinez for Dishonesty, Misconduct, and violation of the Anti-Graft Act. The charges included failure to remit project income, unauthorized use of a barangay vehicle, and unliquidated cash advances. After Martinez was declared in default for failing to file an Answer, the Sangguniang Bayan rendered a Decision on July 28, 2005, imposing the penalty of removal from office. Municipal Mayor Severino Bagasao, while opining that the Sangguniang Bayan lacked removal power, nonetheless issued a Memorandum to implement the decision by preventing Martinez from assuming office after a preventive suspension.
Martinez filed a Special Civil Action for Certiorari before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), assailing the Sangguniang Bayan’s Decision. The RTC, in its Orders dated October 20 and November 30, 2005, declared the Sangguniang Bayan’s Decision and the Mayor’s implementing Memorandum void. It ruled that the Sangguniang Bayan exceeded its jurisdiction in ordering Martinez’s removal. The Sangguniang Barangay elevated the case to the Supreme Court via a Petition for Review on Certiorari.
ISSUE
Whether the Sangguniang Bayan has the power to remove an elective barangay official from office.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court affirmed the RTC’s ruling, holding that the Sangguniang Bayan has no jurisdiction to remove an elective local official from office. The legal logic is anchored on a clear statutory construction of the Local Government Code. Section 60 of Republic Act No. 7160 explicitly provides that an elective local official may be removed from office “by order of the proper court.” The Court emphasized that this provision is unequivocal and leaves no room for interpretation: the power of removal is exclusively judicial. While Section 61 designates the Sangguniang Bayan as the disciplining authority for elective barangay officials, its authority is limited to imposing penalties other than removal, such as suspension or reprimand. The legislative intent, as discerned from the Code’s deliberations and prior jurisprudence like Salalima v. Guingona, Jr., was to insulate elective officials from removal by political bodies, reserving such grave sanction to the courts to ensure due process and objectivity. Consequently, the Sangguniang Bayan’s Decision ordering Martinez’s removal was issued without jurisdiction and is null and void. The Court resolved the issue despite the mootness of the case due to the expiration of Martinez’s term, as it involves a legal question capable of repetition yet evading review.