RTC denies motion for reconsideration of former MinDA chairperson Acosta

DAVAO CITY (MindaNews / 11 July)—The Regional Trial Court (RTC)-Branch 11 of Davao City denied the motion for reconsideration filed by ousted Mindanao Development Authority (MinDA) chairperson Maria Belen S. Acosta on the order denying the quo warranto petition that she brought against her successor, Secretary Leo Tereso A. Magno.

In an 18-page decision dated July 10 but released to MindaNews on Thursday, the RTC-Branch 11, presided by judge Nanette Gustilo Lemana, exhaustively discussed the nature of the position of a MinDA chairperson as well as the bases for denying Acosta’s motion filed last May 30.

The trial court maintained that the position of a MinDA chairperson is “policy determining and primarily confidential in nature” and, as such, the official may be removed “for cause” due to loss of trust and confidence by the President, who is the appointing authority.

As of 5:34 p.m., the camp of former Secretary Acosta has yet to respond to request for comment.

The court explained that tenure of officials “holding primarily confidential positions ends upon loss of confidence, because their term of office lasts only as long as confidence in them endures.”

Citing Republic Act No. 9996, the law creating MinDA, the trial court said that the MinDA chairperson shall be “appointed by the President of the Philippines with a cabinet rank, and shall serve for a term of six years from the date of his or her appointment unless removed for cause.”

As the MinDA chairperson holds a cabinet position, the court said that it is one of the non-career service positions under Section 9 of the Administrative Code whose tenure is “limited to a period specified by law, or which is coterminous with that of the appointing authority or subject to his pleasure.”

The court explained that an official who serves at the pleasure of the President holds a coterminous employment.

“As the MinDA chairperson is an official with a Cabinet rank, his tenure is certainly at the pleasure of the President, just like any other Department Head. To rule otherwise would result in an absurd situation wherein the President can remove the Department Heads at his pleasure but cannot do the same to the MinDA chairperson,” the trial court said.

In holding that the position is policy determining and confidential in nature, the court said that the chairperson’s duties include representing board of directors of MinDA in regular and special Cabinet meetings, and convening the Brunei Darussalam-Indonesia-Malaysia-Philippines-East ASEAN Growth Area (BIMP-EAGA) Advisory Board “to discuss issues and concerns and recommend policies and programs to ensure the widest participation of Mindanao and Palawan in the BIMP-EAGA.”

“As the duty of MinDA chairperson is closely intertwined with the international initiative, it is only proper that the President, as the chief architect of foreign policy, appoints one to whom he has trust and confidence to the said position,” the court added.

It said that it would be “contrary to law and absurd if the MinDA Board is to be considered as superior than the President in diplomatic relations with other countries.”

It added that the MinDA chairperson merely represents the President as his alter ego in the BIMP-EAGA Advisory Board.

On Acosta’s argument that the term of office of MinDA chairperson is fixed to six years, the court ruled that the position was coterminous with the term of office of the President who appointed her and that she was merely occupying the position in holdover capacity when she continued to serve after former President Rodrigo Duterte’s six-year term ended on June 30, 2022.

Acosta assumed office on January 13, 2022.

“The incumbent President [Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr.] is not barred from reposing his trust and confidence in the MinDA Chairperson appointed by a former President,” she said. (Antonio L. Colina IV / MindaNews)