You are on page 1of 2


Economic Intelligence and Investigation Bureau (EIIB)- by virtue of Cory

Aquinos EO 127, it was designated to perform functions primarily to gather
information and pieces of evidence on illegal activities, such as, but not
limited to the ff:
a. Economic sabotage
b. Smuggling
c. Tax evasion
d. Dollar salting
By virtue of Memorandum Order 225, EIIB was assigned as the agency of
primary responsibility for ANTI-SMUGGLING OPERATIONS
11 years after, Erap issued EO 191 Deactivation of the EIIB because of
the ff:
a. The designated functions of EIIB are also performed by other agencies
b. There is a need to monitor the overlapping functions
Erap issued EO 196 creating the Presidential Anti-Smuggling Task Force
Erap also issued EO 223, EIIB employees were separated from service
pursuant to the reorganization hence, the case.
(1) WON EO Nos. 191 and 223 are unconstitutional (Sec. 2(3) Art. IX-B) and do
these amount to grave abuse of discretion
Sec. 2 (3) Art. IX- B. No officer or employee of the civil service shall be
removed or suspended except for cause provided by law.
(2) WON EO Nos. 191 and 223 are considered reorganization of the EIIB and if
these were done in good faith
(3) WON the President has the authority to abolish EIIB
(1) The petitioners right to security of tenure is not violated.
Reorganizations in this jurisdiction have been regarded as valid provided they
are pursued in good faith. As a general rule, a reorganization is carried out in
good faith if it is for the purpose of economy or to make bureaucracy more
efficient. In that event, no dismissal (in case of dismissal) or separation
actually occurs because the position itself ceases to exist. And in that case,
security of tenure would not be a Chinese wall.
There is no such thing as an absolute right to hold office. Except
constitutional offices which provide for special immunity as regards salary
and tenure, no one can be said to have any vested right in an office or its

(2) Yes, it is considered as reorganization. It is valid so long as it is done in

GOOD FAITH. It is done in good faith if it is for the purpose of economy or to
make bureaucracy more efficient. RA 6656 provides for 5 circumstances of
1. where there is a significant increase in the number of positions in the new
staffing pattern of the department or agency concerned;
2. where an office is abolished and another performing substantially the same
functions is created;
3. where incumbents are replaced by those less qualified in terms of status of
appointment, performance and merit;
4. where there is a classification of offices in the department or agency
concerned and the reclassified offices perform substantially the same
functions as the original offices, and
5. where the removal violates the order of separation
Even though Aduana was established after the deactivation of EIIB, it was
done for economy.
3 Justifications:
1. No employment was made for the task force, they are employees of other
existing agencies.
2. The idea is to encourage and utilize personnel, facilities and resources
instead of maintaining an independent office, which is burdensome for the
3. Based on the budget appropriation, it was evident that the intent was to
lessen the expenses of EIIB
Task Force Aduana have additional powers that EIIB previously do not
possess, i.e. power to effect searches, seizures and arrests. Furthermore, it
has the authority to investigate cases involving ill-gotten wealth.
(3) Yes, the President has the authority to do so. Sec. 48 of RA 7645 provides:
Scaling Down and Phase Out of Activities of Agencies Within the Executive
Branch. The heads of departments, bureaus and offices and agencies are
hereby directed to identify their respective activities which are no longer
essential in the delivery of public services and which may be scaled down,
phased out or abolished, subject to civil service rules and regulations. X X X.
Actual scaling down, phasing out or abolition of the activities shall be effected
pursuant to Circulars or Orders issued for the purpose by the Office of the