Teacher’s day today. Well it’s only proper I guess to acknowledge and give recognition to our beloved teachers or at least the teaching profession here and all over the world. No matter what set up it is, whether be it in a strict sense like the high discipline of law and medicine, the academe, short courses instructors, the vocational field, and even your music mentor. They deserve acclamation and praise. And this is the day I guess to do all that.
You know there's Mothers Day, Fathers Day, but never did they give tribute to a profession other than the teaching profession. You don't hear people saying, or the calendar reserving a day for lawyers or politicians. And you don't hear people saying 'Happy Doctors Day!' exclaiming 'we must thank our doctors', no.. nor firemen, nor policemen.. no.. you only hear "Happy Teacher's Day!!" Why?.. because it is considered the noblest profession. It is by public policy considered 'the unselfish work'. Because when you teach you impart, your knowledge, your own skill, you give a part of your self, and that is considered sacrificial in a way, even if you earn wages and get paid for it, it still is and will always be known, since time immemorial the noblest of all profession.
You know there's Mothers Day, Fathers Day, but never did they give tribute to a profession other than the teaching profession. You don't hear people saying, or the calendar reserving a day for lawyers or politicians. And you don't hear people saying 'Happy Doctors Day!' exclaiming 'we must thank our doctors', no.. nor firemen, nor policemen.. no.. you only hear "Happy Teacher's Day!!" Why?.. because it is considered the noblest profession. It is by public policy considered 'the unselfish work'. Because when you teach you impart, your knowledge, your own skill, you give a part of your self, and that is considered sacrificial in a way, even if you earn wages and get paid for it, it still is and will always be known, since time immemorial the noblest of all profession.
Lots of good movies about teachers out there by the way. Let's see.. well there's the.. well the recent 'English Teacher' is one. Julianne Moore. 'Stand and Deliver' now that's one hell of a teacher movie. 'Dead Poets Society' who can forget that. "Carpe Diem!" (God bless Mr. Robin William's soul). 'Mr. Holland’s Opus' who could forget the music there? The movie that reminds us that, even when it seems frustrating and futile, teaching changes lives – both your students and your own. 'Lean On Me' the one with Morgan Freeman? Ever seen a teacher wandering the halls with a baseball bat? Extreme approach but it worked in the movie. 'October Sky' dang! that's a good one. 'Dangerous Minds' how can I forget? "As I walk through the valley of the shadow of death..". And of course we mustn't forget.. 'School Of Rock' Damn it! hahaha! 'can't leave that out, Jack Black? 'Remember the Titans' with Denssel Washington is also a good one. These are just few of the many motion pictures that paid tribute to our teachers.
Let's get to the case..
Let's get to the case..
Ok here’s the scene.. Teacher’s Rally… no no no not the teacher’s rally some would think like they climb up to Baguio and conduct symposiums and get resource speakers and socialize with all the public teachers nationwide huh? This is the real deal with all the placard picket and stuff. There were I think 800 public school teachers, among them members of the Manila Public School Teachers Association (MPSTA) and the Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT).
These teachers undertook what is described to be a mass concerted action dramatizing and highlighting their plight resulting from the alleged failure of public authorities (particularly DECS) to act upon their grievances that had time and again been brought to the latter’s attention which had elicited no response from the then Secretary of Education Isidro D. Cariño.
The “mass actions” consisted in staying away from their classes, converging at the Liwasang Bonifacio, gathering in peaceable assemblies. The Secretary of Education served them with return to work order within 24 hours or face dismissal. For failure to heed the return-to-work order, 8 teachers from the Ramon Magsaysay High School were administratively charged, preventively suspended for 90 days pursuant to sec. 41, P.D. 807 and temporarily replaced. An investigation committee was consequently formed to hear the charges.
A case was filed with RTC, raising the issue of violation of the right of the striking teachers’ to due process of law. The case was eventually elevated to SC.
But that's not the issue here..
The bone of contention here started when the respondent teachers (8 teachers from Ramon Magsaysay High School) submitted sworn statements to the Commission on Human Rights to complain that while they were participating in peaceful mass actions, they suddenly learned of their replacement as teachers, allegedly without notice and consequently for reasons completely unknown to them.
While the case was pending with the CHR the SC promulgated its resolution over the cases filed with it earlier, upholding Sec. Carino’s act of issuing the return-to-work orders.
Despite this, CHR continued hearing its case and held that the “striking teachers” “were denied due process of law;…they should not have been replaced without a chance to reply to the administrative charges;” there had been violation of their civil and political rights which the Commission is empowered to investigate.”
So can you see the picture? SC stood at the side of the DECS while the CHR supported the rights of the teachers.
ISSUE:
Does the Commission on Human Rights have jurisdiction and ADJUDICATORY POWERS (power to hear and determine as well as try and decide) human rights violation involving civil or political right?
RULING:
Court declares the CHR has no such power.
The Constitution itself clearly and categorically grants to the Commission the (1) power to investigate all forms of human rights violations involving civil and political rights. It can exercise that power on its own initiative or on complaint of any person. And it may only exercise such power pursuant to such rules of procedure as it may adopt, and cases of violations of said rules, (2) cite for contempt in accordance with the Rules of Court. In the course of any investigation conducted by it, it may (3) grant immunity from prosecution to any person whose testimony or whose possession of documents or other evidence is necessary to determine the truth. It may also (4) request the assistance of any department, bureau, office, or agency in the performance of its functions, in the conduct of its investigation or in extending such remedy as may be required by its findings.
BUT IT CANNOT TRY AND DECIDE CASES OR HEAR AND DETERMINE CAUSES AS COURTS OF JUSTICE, OR EVEN QUASI JUDICIAL BODIES DO.
So it's clear. The CHR was not meant by the Constitution to be another court or quasi-judicial agency. Let's try to differentiate:
These teachers undertook what is described to be a mass concerted action dramatizing and highlighting their plight resulting from the alleged failure of public authorities (particularly DECS) to act upon their grievances that had time and again been brought to the latter’s attention which had elicited no response from the then Secretary of Education Isidro D. Cariño.
The “mass actions” consisted in staying away from their classes, converging at the Liwasang Bonifacio, gathering in peaceable assemblies. The Secretary of Education served them with return to work order within 24 hours or face dismissal. For failure to heed the return-to-work order, 8 teachers from the Ramon Magsaysay High School were administratively charged, preventively suspended for 90 days pursuant to sec. 41, P.D. 807 and temporarily replaced. An investigation committee was consequently formed to hear the charges.
A case was filed with RTC, raising the issue of violation of the right of the striking teachers’ to due process of law. The case was eventually elevated to SC.
But that's not the issue here..
The bone of contention here started when the respondent teachers (8 teachers from Ramon Magsaysay High School) submitted sworn statements to the Commission on Human Rights to complain that while they were participating in peaceful mass actions, they suddenly learned of their replacement as teachers, allegedly without notice and consequently for reasons completely unknown to them.
While the case was pending with the CHR the SC promulgated its resolution over the cases filed with it earlier, upholding Sec. Carino’s act of issuing the return-to-work orders.
Despite this, CHR continued hearing its case and held that the “striking teachers” “were denied due process of law;…they should not have been replaced without a chance to reply to the administrative charges;” there had been violation of their civil and political rights which the Commission is empowered to investigate.”
So can you see the picture? SC stood at the side of the DECS while the CHR supported the rights of the teachers.
ISSUE:
Does the Commission on Human Rights have jurisdiction and ADJUDICATORY POWERS (power to hear and determine as well as try and decide) human rights violation involving civil or political right?
RULING:
Court declares the CHR has no such power.
The Constitution itself clearly and categorically grants to the Commission the (1) power to investigate all forms of human rights violations involving civil and political rights. It can exercise that power on its own initiative or on complaint of any person. And it may only exercise such power pursuant to such rules of procedure as it may adopt, and cases of violations of said rules, (2) cite for contempt in accordance with the Rules of Court. In the course of any investigation conducted by it, it may (3) grant immunity from prosecution to any person whose testimony or whose possession of documents or other evidence is necessary to determine the truth. It may also (4) request the assistance of any department, bureau, office, or agency in the performance of its functions, in the conduct of its investigation or in extending such remedy as may be required by its findings.
BUT IT CANNOT TRY AND DECIDE CASES OR HEAR AND DETERMINE CAUSES AS COURTS OF JUSTICE, OR EVEN QUASI JUDICIAL BODIES DO.
So it's clear. The CHR was not meant by the Constitution to be another court or quasi-judicial agency. Let's try to differentiate:
Investigate vs. Adjudicate
The legal meaning of "investigate" is to follow up step by step by patient inquiry or observation. To trace or track; to search into; to examine and inquire into with care and accuracy; to find out by careful inquisition; examination; the taking of evidence; a legal inquiry;" "to inquire; to make an investigation," "investigation" being in turn describe as "an administrative function, the exercise of which ordinarily does not require a hearing. It is an inquiry, judicial or otherwise, for the discovery and collection of facts concerning a certain matter or matters."
Hence it is that the Commission on Human Rights, having merely the power "to investigate," cannot and should not "try and resolve on the merits" (adjudicate) the matters involved in the Striking Teachers.In the legal sense, "adjudicate" means: to adjudge, arbitrate, judge, decide, determine, resolve, rule on, settle. "To settle in the exercise of judicial authority. To determine finally. Synonymous with adjudge in its strictest sense;" and "adjudge" means: " To pass on judicially, to decide, settle or decree, or to sentence or condemn. Clearly it implies a judicial determination of a fact, and the entry of a judgment."
