Transfer order of BoC...

three other SC justices — Mariano Del Castillo, Jose Catral Mendoza, and Diosdado Peralta — concurred with the ruling except for Associate Justice Marvic Leonen who had a dissenting opinion.

Under the CPO issued by then BoC Commissioner Ruffy Biazon and approved by Finance Secretary Cesar Purisima, the port collectors were detailed to the CPRO, which was created by Executive Order No. 140 to reform the revenue-generating agency.

The DOF calls the CPRO as the agency’s “think tank,” which is tasked to review tariff and customs administration policies, but it is largely regarded as an office where Customs employees stay while on a “floating” status.

This prompted the BoC collectors to seek relief from a Manila court, citing lack of due process and violation of their security of tenure. They claimed their detail to CPRO, in effect, was a demotion.

With this, the Supreme Court ruled in their favor.

“We commend and support the reforms being undertaken in the different agencies of the government. However, we can’t allow department heads to take shortcuts that will undermine and disregard the basic procedures of the law,” it said.

The 10-page decision cited the absence of rules and regulations as well as procedures and processes that should have been promulgated and prescribed by Purisima to “enable CPRO to effectively exercise its powers and duties.”

“Respondents (collectors) were supposed to augment and reinforce the existing organic personnel of CPRO. Yet, at the time of respondents’ detail, CPRO had not been formally organized. CPRO had no organic personnel that had been approved by Department of Budget and Management,” the SC said.