True or False.
A person who occupies an office that is defectively created is a de facto officer. (0.5%)
The rule on nepotism does not apply to designations made in favor of a relative of the authority making a designation. (0.5%)
A discretionary duty of a public officer is never delegable. (0.5%)
Acquisition of civil service eligibility during tenure of a temporary appointee does not automatically translate to a permanent appointment. (0.5%)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
1. False; 2. False; 3. True; 4. True. Under Tuanda v. Sandiganbayan, a de facto officer requires a de jure office. Under Laurel v. CSC, nepotism rules cover both appointments and designations.
Unlock the full Political Law answers365 days of full access. GCash, Maya and card accepted.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
Can a person be considered a de facto officer if the office itself was defectively created and legally non-existent?
Under settled jurisprudence, there can be no de facto officer without a validly existing de jure office.
Does the prohibition against nepotism apply to a temporary designation of a relative by an appointing authority?
The prohibition against nepotism extends to both formal appointments and official designations.
What is the general rule regarding the delegation of discretionary duties by a public officer?
Discretionary powers involving personal judgment cannot be delegated without express statutory authority.
What is the legal effect when a temporary appointee acquires civil service eligibility during their tenure?
Choices available with full access.
Under Philippine civil service law, what distinguishes a designation from an appointment?
Choices available with full access.
Learn more about these topics
1. De Facto Officers
A de facto officer is one who has the reputation of being the officer he assumes to be, and who is in the full possession of an office, exercising its duties under color of authority. However, under settled Philippine jurisprudence, there can be no de facto officer without a de jure office. Where an office is defectively created or unconstitutional and thus legally non-existent, a person occupying or attempting to perform the functions of such non-existent office cannot acquire the status of a de facto officer.
2. Prohibition on Nepotism
The statutory rule on nepotism under administrative and civil service law prohibits all appointments made in favor of a relative of the appointing or recommending authority within the prohibited degree of consanguinity or affinity. In Laurel v. Civil Service Commission, the Supreme Court clarified that the prohibition against nepotism applies equally to temporary or official designations as it does to regular appointments. Allowing designations to bypass nepotistic restrictions would defeat the legislative purpose of ensuring merit, fitness, and integrity in public service.
3. Civil Service Appointments
A temporary appointment is given to a person who may not possess the requisite civil service eligibility, serving at the pleasure of the appointing power. Under established jurisprudence including Maturan v. Maglana, the subsequent acquisition of civil service eligibility during the tenure of a temporary appointee does not automatically convert or translate the temporary appointment into a permanent one. To attain permanent status, a completely new appointment expressly indicating permanent tenure must be extended by the competent appointing authority.