Manila Electric Co. v. Lim, G.R. No. 184769, October 5, 2010

-

Summary: Rosario G. Lim aka Cherry Lim, is an administrative clerk at MERALCO.

On June 4, 2008, an anonymous letter was posted at the door of the Metering Office of the Administration building of MERALCO Plaridel, Bulacan Sector, at which Lim is assigned, denouncing Lim. The letter reads:

MATAPOS MONG LAMUNIN LAHAT NG BIYAYA NG MERALCO, NGAYON NAMAN AY GUSTO MONG PALAMON ANG BUONG KUMPANYA SA MGA BUWAYA NG GOBYERNO. KAPAL NG MUKHA MO, LUMAYAS KA RITO, WALANG UTANG NA LOOB….

Alexander Deyto, Head of MERALCO’s HR Staffing, directed the transfer of Lim to MERALCO’s Alabang Sector in Muntinlupa as "in light of the receipt of "… reports that there were accusations and threats directed against [her] from unknown individuals and which could possibly compromise [her] safety and security."

Lim appealed her transfer.

No response to her appeal having been received, Lim filed a petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas data against MERALCO et al before the RTC Bulacan.

She prayed for the issuance of a writ commanding Ps to file a written return containing the following:

a) a full disclosure of the data or information about her in relation to the report purportedly received by Ps on the alleged threat to her safety and security; the nature of such data and the purpose for its collection;

b) the measures taken by Ps to ensure the confidentiality of such data or information; and

c) the currency and accuracy of such data or information obtained.

Additionally, Lim prayed for the issuance of a TRO enjoining Ps from effecting her transfer to the MERALCO Alabang Sector. RTC Bulacan granted Lim’s application for a TRO.

Peitioners moved for the dismissal of the petition and recall of the TRO.

Still RTC Bulacan ruled in favor of Lim, and granted her prayers including the issuance of a WPI directing Petitioners to desist from implementing her transfer until such time that Petitioners comply with the disclosures required.

Hence, the present petition for review under Rule 45 of 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure and the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data.

------------------------------------

MERALCO's Position:

 1) the RTC lacked jurisdiction over the case and cannot restrain MERALCO’s prerogative as employer to transfer the place of work of its employees.

2) the issuance of the writ is outside the parameters expressly set forth in the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data.

- the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data directs the issuance of the writ only against public officials or employees, or private individuals or entities engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data or information regarding an aggrieved party’s person, family or home; MERALCO (or its officers) is clearly not engaged in such activities.

------------------------------------

SC reversed the RTC.

-  Lim’s plea that she be spared from complying with MERALCO’s Memorandum directing her reassignment to the Alabang Sector, under the guise of a quest for information or data allegedly in possession of Ps, does not fall within the province of a writ of habeas data.

- like the writ of amparo, habeas data was conceived as a response, given the lack of effective and available remedies, to address the extraordinary rise in the number of killings and enforced disappearances. Its intent is to address violations of or threats to the rights to life, liberty or security as a remedy independently from those provided under prevailing Rules.

- Castillo v. Cruz underscores the emphasis laid down in Tapuz v. del Rosario that the writs of amparo and habeas data will NOT issue to protect purely property or commercial concerns nor when the grounds invoked in support of the petitions therefor are vague or doubtful. Employment constitutes a property right under the context of the due process clause of the Constitution. It is evident that Lim’s reservations on the real reasons for her transfer - a legitimate concern respecting the terms and conditions of one’s employment - are what prompted her to adopt the extraordinary remedy of habeas data. Jurisdiction over such concerns is inarguably lodged by law with the NLRC and the Labor Arbiters.

--------------------------------------------

Ponente: CARPIO MORALES, J.

A Petition for review under Rule 45

Facts:

Rosario G. Lim aka Cherry Lim, is an administrative clerk at MERALCO.

On June 4, 2008, an anonymous letter was posted at the door of the Metering Office of the Administration building of MERALCO Plaridel, Bulacan Sector, at which Lim is assigned, denouncing Lim. The letter reads:

MATAPOS MONG LAMUNIN LAHAT NG BIYAYA NG MERALCO, NGAYON NAMAN AY GUSTO MONG PALAMON ANG BUONG KUMPANYA SA MGA BUWAYA NG GOBYERNO. KAPAL NG MUKHA MO, LUMAYAS KA RITO, WALANG UTANG NA LOOB….

Copies of the letter were also inserted in the lockers of MERALCO linesmen. Informed about it, Lim reported the matter to the Plaridel Station of the PNP.

By Memorandum dated July 4, 2008, Alexander Deyto, Head of MERALCO’s HR Staffing, directed the transfer of Lim to MERALCO’s Alabang Sector in Muntinlupa as "in light of the receipt of "… reports that there were accusations and threats directed against [her] from unknown individuals and which could possibly compromise [her] safety and security."

Lim, by letter addressed to Ruben A. Sapitula, VP and Head of MERALCO’s HR Administration, appealed her transfer and requested for a dialogue so she could voice her concerns and misgivings on the matter, claiming that the "punitive" nature of the transfer amounted to a denial of due process. Citing the grueling travel from her residence in Pampanga to Alabang and back entails, and violation of the provisions on job security of their CBA. Lim expressed her thoughts on the alleged threats to her security in this wise:

x x x x

I feel that it would have been better . . . if you could have intimated to me the nature of the alleged accusations and threats so that at least I could have found out if these are credible or even serious. But as you stated, these came from unknown individuals and the way they were handled, it appears that the veracity of these accusations and threats to be [sic] highly suspicious, doubtful or are just mere jokes if they existed at all.

Assuming for the sake of argument only, that the alleged threats exist as the management apparently believe, then my transfer to an unfamiliar place and environment which will make me a "sitting duck" so to speak, seems to betray the real intent of management which is contrary to its expressed concern on my security and safety . . . Thus, it made me think twice on the rationale for management’s initiated transfer. Reflecting further, it appears to me that instead of the management supposedly extending favor to me, the net result and effect of management action would be a punitive one.

No response to her request having been received, Lim filed a petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas data against MERALCO et al before the RTC Bulacan.

She prayed for the issuance of a writ commanding Petitioners to file a written return containing the following:

a) a full disclosure of the data or information about her in relation to the report purportedly received by Ps on the alleged threat to her safety and security; the nature of such data and the purpose for its collection;

b) the measures taken by Petitioners to ensure the confidentiality of such data or information; and

c) the currency and accuracy of such data or information obtained.

Additionally, Lim prayed for the issuance of a TRO enjoining Petitiones from effecting her transfer to the MERALCO Alabang Sector.

RTC Bulacan granted Lim’s application for a TRO. 

Petitioners moved for the dismissal of the petition and recall of the TRO on the grounds that, inter alia, resort to a petition for writ of habeas data was not in order; and the RTC lacked jurisdiction over the case which properly belongs to the NLRC.

RTC Bulacan ruled in favor of Lim, and granted her prayers including the issuance of a WPI directing Peitioners to desist from implementing Lim’s transfer until such time that petitioners comply with the disclosures required.

-  recourse to a writ of habeas data should extend not only to victims of extra-legal killings and political activists but also to ordinary citizens, like Lim whose rights to life and security are jeopardized by Ps’ refusal to provide her with information or data on the reported threats to her person.

Hence, the present petition for review under Rule 45 of 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure and the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data.

------------------------------------

MERALCO's Position:

 1) the RTC lacked jurisdiction over the case and cannot restrain MERALCO’s prerogative as employer to transfer the place of work of its employees.

- although ingeniously crafted as a petition for habeas data, Lim is essentially questioning the transfer of her place of work by her employer and the terms and conditions of her employment which arise from an employer-employee relationship over which the NLRC and the Labor Arbiters under A217 of the Labor Code have jurisdiction.

- OCA-Circular No. 79-200312 expressly prohibits the issuance of TROs or injunctive writs in labor-related cases..

2) the issuance of the writ is outside the parameters expressly set forth in the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data.

- the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data directs the issuance of the writ only against public officials or employees, or private individuals or entities engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data or information regarding an aggrieved party’s person, family or home; MERALCO (or its officers) is clearly not engaged in such activities.

------------------------------------

WON the the issuance of the writ is outside the parameters expressly set forth in the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data.

Held: Yes

Lim’s plea that she be spared from complying with MERALCO’s Memorandum directing her reassignment to the Alabang Sector, under the guise of a quest for information or data allegedly in possession of Ps, does not fall within the province of a writ of habeas data.

Section 1 of the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data provides:

Section 1. Habeas Data. – The writ of habeas data is a remedy available to any person whose right to privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee or of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering, collecting or storing of data or information regarding the person, family, home and correspondence of the aggrieved party.

The habeas data rule, in general, is designed to protect by means of judicial complaint the image, privacy, honor, information, and freedom of information of an individual. It is meant to provide a forum to enforce one’s right to the truth and to informational privacy, thus safeguarding the constitutional guarantees of a person’s right to life, liberty and security against abuse in this age of information technology.

It bears reiteration that like the writ of amparo, habeas data was conceived as a response, given the lack of effective and available remedies, to address the extraordinary rise in the number of killings and enforced disappearances. Its intent is to address violations of or threats to the rights to life, liberty or security as a remedy independently from those provided under prevailing Rules.

Castillo v. Cruz underscores the emphasis laid down in Tapuz v. del Rosario that the writs of amparo and habeas data will NOT issue to protect purely property or commercial concerns nor when the grounds invoked in support of the petitions therefor are vague or doubtful. Employment constitutes a property right under the context of the due process clause of the Constitution. It is evident that Lim’s reservations on the real reasons for her transfer - a legitimate concern respecting the terms and conditions of one’s employment - are what prompted her to adopt the extraordinary remedy of habeas data. Jurisdiction over such concerns is inarguably lodged by law with the NLRC and the Labor Arbiters.

In another vein, there is no showing from the facts presented that Ps committed any unjustifiable or unlawful violation of Lim’s right to privacy vis-a-vis the right to life, liberty or security. To argue that Ps’ refusal to disclose the contents of reports allegedly received on the threats to Lim’s safety amounts to a violation of her right to privacy is at best speculative. Lim in fact trivializes these threats and accusations from unknown individuals in her earlier-quoted portion of her July 10, 2008 letter as "highly suspicious, doubtful or are just mere jokes if they existed at all."And she even suspects that her transfer to another place of work "betray[s] the real intent of management]" and could be a "punitive move." Her posture unwittingly concedes that the issue is labor-related.

WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The Decision of the Bulacan RTC is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Integrated Bar of the Philippines v. Zamora, G.R. No. 141284, August 15, 2000

-
Ponente: KAPUNAN J. A Special Civil Action in the Supreme Court. Certiorari and Prohibition. Summary:  Petitioner: Integrated Bar of the Philippines Respondent: Hon. Ronaldo B. Zamora, Gen. Panfilo M. Lacson, Gen. Edgar B. Aglipay, Gen. Angelo Reyes President Estrada deployed the Marines to patrol certain parts of Metro Manila. IBP questioned  the constitutionality of this action. The SC decided that the IBP has no locus standi but chose to take cognizance of the petition as it is of paramount importance to the public (especially in light of Martial Law). SC decided that Estrada's deployment of Marines is constitutional and dismissed the filed petition. ---------------------------------------- Facts: President Estrada, in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief and through a verbal directive, deployed the Marines, to join the PNP in visibility patrols in response to alarming increase in violent crimes in Metro Manila. The PNP Chief, through Police Chief Superintendent Edgar B....
Read more

Aurbach v. Sanitary Wares Manufacturing Corp., G.R. Nos. 75875, 75951 & 75975-76, December 15, 1989

-
Summary:  American Standard Inc (ASI), a foreign corporation in US entered into an Agreement with Saniwares and some Filipino investors whereby ASI and the Filipino investors agreed to participate in the ownership of an enterprise which would engage primarily in the business of manufacturing in the Philippines and selling here and abroad vitreous china and sanitary wares. ASI agreed to accept the role of minority vis-a-vis the Filipino investors, on the condition that the Agreement should contain provisions to protect ASI as the minority. One such provision is: As long as American-Standard shall own at least 30% of the outstanding stock of the Corporation, three of the nine directors shall be designated by American-Standard, and the other six shall be designated by the other stockholders of the Corporation. (Section 5(a) of the Agreement) . The 30% capital stock of ASI was later increased to 40%. On Mar 8, 1983, the election of the members of the board of directors was held. - Th...
Read more

Atong Paglaum, Inc. v. Commission on Elections, G.R. Nos. 203766, 203818-19, 203922 & etc., April 2, 2013

-
Summary: COMELEC disqualified petitioners from participating in the May 13 elections,  by denying their new petitions for registration, or by canceling of their existing registration or accreditation as party-list organizations. Petitioners assailed the decision before the SC. SC reversed its ruling in Bagong Bayani and Banat, and remanded the petitions to the COMELEC to determine again the qualifications of these organizations but this time based on the parameters the SC laid down in this case. SC ruled that limiting the party-lists system to the marginalized and underrepresented sectors violates Sec 5, Art 6 the 1987 Constitution and RA 7941. ---------------------------------------- Ponente: CARPIO J. Facts: COMELEC issued resolutions that denied or canceled the party-list registrations or the accreditation of the ff 13 organizations: ASIN, Manila Teachers, ALA-EH, 1AAAP, AKIN, AAB, AI, ALONA, KALIKASAN, GUARDIAN, PPP and PBB. Either the (1) the sectors they respectively repre...
Read more