Cornejo v. Naval G.R. No. 33648. July 30, 1930

Facts: Miguel R. Cornejo was the municipal president of Pasay, Rizal. Eligio Naval was the provincial governor, while Jose M. Perez and Celestino de Dios constitute the provincial board of Rizal. The CFI of Rizal found Cornejo guilty of the criminal act of falsification of a private document and sentenced him therefor to one year, eight months, and twenty-one days’ imprisonment, to pay a fine of 1,000 pesetas, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to suffer the accessory penalties provided by law. An appeal from this judgment was taken by the accused to the Supreme Court. Immediately after the conviction in the trial court, the provincial governor of Rizal filed with the provincial board of that province an administrative complaint against Cornejo for corruption and improper conduct unbecoming a public officer. Thereafter, the provincial governor suspended Cornejo as president of Pasay pending action by the provincial board on the administrative charges preferred against Cornejo. Aside from filing an answer and challenging the jurisdiction of the provincial board, Cornejo did not otherwise defend himself before the board. The provincial board eventually decided that it had jurisdiction to investigate the charges, conducted its investigation, and recommended to the Chief of the Executive Bureau the suspension from the office of Cornejo pending the final determination by the Supreme Court of his appeal. On the recommendation of the Chief of the Executive Bureau, the Secretary of the Interior on April 29, 1930, approved the suspension of Cornejo as municipal president of Pasay, Rizal, for a period of time to extend to the conclusion of his appeal to the Supreme Court.

Issue: Whether or not a provincial governor and a provincial board have the power to suspend a municipal president who has been convicted for a crime by a trial court

Held: No. The provincial board acted in excess of jurisdiction.

Ratio: Under Section 2188 of the Administrative Code, “The provincial governor shall receive and investigate complaints made under oath against municipal officers for neglect of duty, oppression, corruption, or other form of maladministration in office. For minor delinquency he may reprimand the offender; and if a more severe punishment seems to be desirable, he shall submit written charges touching the matter to the provincial board, furnishing a copy of such charges to the accused either personally or by registered mail, and he may in such case suspend the officer (not being the municipal treasurer) pending action by the board, if in his opinion the charge be one affecting the official integrity of the officer in question. Where suspension is thus effected, the written charges against the officer shall be filed with the board within five days.” The SC held that the terms “office” “officer” would limit action to misconduct relating to the office and not extending to personal misbehavior.