Recent statements of President Rodrigo Duterte on the firing of government employees en masse—particularly appointees from the previous administrations—sent shivers down the spine of the bureaucracy. He said this was an anti-corruption measure to clean up the government.
Others fear gross violation of a constitutional provision protecting the tenure of civil service employees from unreasonable or arbitrary removal or suspension. Rep. Edcel Lagman of Albay, for instance, asked in a legislative hearing on the 2017 budget whether Duterte’s memorandum circular 4 in in accord with the Constitution.
However, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) assured on Wednesday, August 24, that the president did not violate the law when he dismissed employees to clean up the bureaucracy, especially ordering appointees of previous presidents fired.
But Lagman sees it differently. To him it’s like the “sword of Damocles” ready to swing and make heads roll, especially of the “overwhelming majority of presidential appointees.”
“This is a class legislation because it only favors those appointed by the incumbent president and discriminates against those appointed by the previous presidents,” the lawmaker said.
“The sword of Damocles has never been unleashed, it is a threat. To the faint-hearted, it will be a painful experience,” Lagman added.
But Alicia Dela Rosa-Bala, CSC chair, assured that those fired would be people without security of tenure, or those who are non-career service employees serving at the president’s pleasure.
Moreover, the CSC said that Duterte’s move “did not violate the constitutional provision on civil servants.”
[ads1]
Ariel Ronquillo, CSC Legal Affairs director, put it this way:
“If the intention of this memorandum circular is to remove or terminate the services of previous presidential appointees who do not enjoy security of tenure because they’re holding non-career positions―while it appears to be a class legislation―I think it will not transgress that constitutional guarantee,” Ronquillo stressed. Such appointees “can be removed at any time at the pleasure of the appointing authority. The power to appoint also includes the power to remove,” Ronquillo added.
Anyway, Ronquillo assumed that appointed officials were sufficiently oriented upon their assumption to office that they could be fired or removed anytime.
“My understanding of the ‘sword of Damocles’ is, it’s an ax ready to fall anytime on whomever it may be directed. This memorandum circular basically enumerates those who will have to go. They are being asked to tender their courtesy resignation,” Ronquillo explained.
These employees “are non-career, those who are not enjoying security of tenure. So therefore, from the start of employment, they know they can go anytime the appointing authority tells them to go,” Ronquillo added.
Lagman said it was all reminiscent of how former Ferdinand Marcos handled the same situation. In 1972, Marcos issued an order for the courtesy resignation of all appointed officials right after martial law was declared.
But Ronquillo insisted that Duterte’s order had specific exemptions that protected career officials.
Source: (newsinfo.inquirer.net)
[ads3]
