Frequently Asked Questions on Administrative Disciplinary Actions Against Public Officials

(The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of your own lawyer to address your legal concerns, if any.

Also, the matters contained in the following were written in accordance with the law, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing and posting, and do not include any future developments on the subject matter under discussion.)

 

Q:        What is the primary basis of accountability of public officers and employees?

The 1987 Constitution provides that “[p]ublic office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency, act with patriotism and justice and lead modest lives”.

Q:        What are the laws, rules, and other legal bases dealing with administrative disciplinary actions against government officers and employees?

Administrative discipline against public officers and/or employees are primarily governed by the following:

1. XI, 1987 Constitution (Public Accountability)
2. IX, 1987 Constitution (Civil Service)
3. The Revised Administrative Code of 1987 (E.O. No. 292)
4. Local Government Code (R.A. No. 7160)
5. Code of Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees (R.A. No. 6713)
6. The Ombudsman Act (R.A. No. 6770)
7. Revised Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service (CSC Resolution No. 1101502)
8. Administrative Disciplinary Rules on Sexual Harassment Cases (CSC Resolution No. 01-0940)
9. Other Civil Service Commission Resolutions
10. Supreme Court Decisions
11. Other laws dealing with administrative discipline.

Q:        What are the characteristics of administrative disciplinary proceedings?

• Administrative offenses do not prescribe. [Floria vs. Sunga, A.M. No. CA-01-10-P, November 14, 2001]

• Administrative cases are generally not subject to settlement, except when the disciplining authority determines that the offense is purely personal and may be subject to settlement (in cases such as borrowing money by superior from subordinate, willful failure to pay just debts, simple misconduct resulting to misunderstanding/fight outside office premises, discourtesy in the course of official duties, and other similar offenses).

• The withdrawal of the complainant is not a ground for the dismissal.

• The complainant is a mere witness to the commission of an administrative offense, hence, anybody can file an administrative complaint.

Q:        Who has disciplinary authority over government officials and employees?

The heads of agencies and instrumentalities shall have jurisdiction to investigate and decide matters involving disciplinary action against officers and employees under their jurisdiction. The same is true for Department Secretaries, and local government units such as provinces, cities and municipalities, with respect to their own employees.

The Office of the Ombudsman shall have disciplinary authority over all elective and appointive officials of the Government and its subdivisions, instrumentalities and agencies, including Members of the Cabinet, local government, government-owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries, except over officials who may be removed only by impeachment or over Members of Congress, and the Judiciary.

Also, the Civil Service Commission (CSC), for being the Central Personnel Agency of the government, has disciplinary authority to hear and decide the following cases:

1. Decisions of the CSC Regional Offices bought before it on appeal or petition for review;
2. Decisions of heads of agencies imposing penalties exceeding 30 days suspension or fine in an amount exceeding 30 days salary brought before it on appeal;
3. Complaints brought against CSC personnel;
4. Complaints about officials who are not presidential appointees;
5. Decisions of heads of agencies imposing penalties not exceeding 30 days suspension or fine equivalent thereto but violating due process;
6. Requests for transfer of venue of hearing on cases being heard by Civil Service Commission Regional Offices;
7. Appeals from the order of preventive suspension; and
8. Such other actions or requests involving issues arising out of or in connection with the foregoing enumeration.

Q:        What are the various stages of an administrative disciplinary proceeding under the Civil Service Commission?

1. Filing of complaint – Complaint refers to the means to bring to the attention of the proper disciplining authority, the commission of infraction by the one being complained of. It must be in writing, notarized (sworn to), must contain the name and address of the complainant and the one being complained of, and the latter’s position and office of employment. If must contain also all relevant facts as to how the act or acts constituting an administrative infraction was committed.

2. Preliminary investigation – A proceeding to determine whether a probable case exists to warrant the issuance of a formal charge. It involves a fact-finding examination of records and documents submitted by the complainant and the person complained of, as well as documents readily available from other government offices.

3. Issuance of a formal charge and filing of an answer – After finding of a probable case, the disciplining authority shall now formally charge the person being complained of, with a directive to the latter to answer the charges within a period of not less than 72 hours from receipt.

4. Preventive suspension – Preventive suspension is not a penalty. It is designed merely as a measure of precaution so that the official or employee charged may be removed from the scene of his alleged infraction while the same is being investigated, to prevent the possibility of exerting undue influence or pressure on the witnesses or tampering of evidence that may be used against him.

5. Formal investigation – It is conducted by the disciplining authority where the merits of the case cannot be decided judiciously without conducting such investigation or when the respondent elects to have one, in which case, the investigation shall be held not earlier than 5 days nor later than 10 days from receipt of the respondent’s answer.

6. Decision – A decision shall be rendered finding the one being complained of either guilty of the charges, or exonerating him therefrom.

Q:        Can a complaint be filed anonymously?

Generally, a complaint cannot be anonymous, as it is required to be verified and subscribed under oath by the complaining party, and that his name and address must likewise be indicated.

However, where the complaint was filed before the Office of the Ombudsman, an anonymous complaint may be entertained, but only if it merits appropriate consideration, or contains sufficient leads or particulars to enable the taking of further action.

Q:        How are administrative offenses classified?

• Grave offenses – Punishable by dismissal from the service for the first offense, or by suspension of 6 months and 1 day to 1 year on the first offense (and dismissal on the second offense), or by demotion.

• Less Grave offenses – Punishable by suspension of 1 month and 1 day to 6 months for the first offense (second offense may be punished by suspension of 6 months and 1 day to 1 year, or dismissal from the service).

• Light offenses – Punishable by reprimand on the first offense, suspension of 1 to 30 days for the second offense, and dismissal from service for the third offense.

Q:        May fines, instead of suspension, be imposed as penalty?

Fine may likewise be imposed as penalty instead of suspension, but only when the following circumstances are present:

1. When the respondent’s office is impressed with national interest;
2. When the respondent is directly dealing with the public, and the personnel complement of the office is insufficient to perform such function;
3. When the respondent committed the offense without using or abusing the powers of his position.

Payment of fine shall be available only if the penalty imposed is 6 months or less, at the ratio of 1 day suspension to 1 day fine. Failure to pay the fine shall bring back the original penalty of suspension, and the respondent shall serve the original penalty of suspension imposed regardless of the amount of fine that was already paid.

Q:        How shall fines be paid?

Fines may be paid in equal monthly installment, subject to the following schedule of payment:

1. Fine equivalent to 1 month salary shall be paid in 2 months;
2. Fine equivalent to 2 months salary shall be paid in 4 months;
3. Fine equivalent to 3 months salary shall be paid in 6 months;
4. Fine equivalent to 4 months salary shall be paid in 8 months;
5. Fine equivalent to 5 months salary shall be paid in 10 months;
6. Fine equivalent to 6 months salary shall be paid in 12 months.

Q:        Are there certain disabilities attached to the imposable administrative penalties?

Yes. Certain penalties carry with them disabilities, such as the following:

1. Dismissal from service – Carries with it forfeiture of retirement benefits, perpetual disqualification from holding public office, and bar from taking the Civil Service Examination;

2. Demotion – Carries with it disqualification from promotion for 1 year;

3. Suspension – Carries with it disqualification from promotion corresponding to the period of suspension;

4. Fine – Disqualification from promotion for the period he was fined.

Q:        Can the administrative penalties imposed be removed?

Yes. In meritorious cases, and upon the recommendation of the Civil Service Commission, the President may grant clemency and lessen, or remove, administrative penalties or disabilities imposed in disciplinary cases. The President, however, may impose terms and conditions in giving clemency to the concerned public officer or employee, in the interest of service.

The officer or employee concerned may apply before the CSC for a favorable recommendation for the lessening or removal of administrative penalties imposed upon him by submitting the following:

1. Certified true copy of the decision in the disciplinary case;

2. Favorable recommendation of the disciplining authority or head of the office from which he was disciplined;

3. Certification from reputable members of the community where he resides, that he is a good parent/family person, neighbor, law abiding citizen, and an active member of the community and civic organizations;

4. Proof of non-pendency of an appeal/petition for review relative to his disciplinary case before any court or tribunal;

5. Proof of payment of the filing fee.

Q:        My superior said that I can be dropped from the rolls. What does it mean?

Dropping from the rolls means separation from the service. Such separation is made summarily, without any case, investigation or due process. For this reason, the Court, in NAPOCOR vs. Zozobrado [G.R. No. 153022, April 10, 2006], stated that the rule on dropping from the rolls should be strictly construed in order that it may not be used as a tool for harassment, vindictiveness or removal of any employee who happens to fall out of grace of his supervisor or superior officers.

This mode of separation from the service is non-disciplinary in nature, and shall result neither in forfeiture of any benefit on the part of the official or employee, nor disqualification from re-employment in the government.

Q:        Who may be dropped from the rolls?

Officers or employees who are either: (1) habitually absent, or (2) have unsatisfactory or poor performance, or (3) have been shown to be physically or mentally unfit to perform their duties, may be dropped from the rolls.

Q:        When can employees be dropped from the rolls?

For those who had been absent without approved leave for at least 30 days, the employee concerned must have been informed of his separation not later than 5 days from its effectivity, to be sent to his last known address. No prior notice is required. However, if the absences incurred is less than 30 days, a return-to-work order shall first be sent to him. His failure to return to work despite the return-to-work order shall constitute a ground to drop him from the rolls.

For those who have been having unsatisfactory performance, they may be dropped from the rolls if the following requisites are present:

1. The employee concerned should be informed of his unsatisfactory performance for a semester;
2. Such notice shall be in writing;
3. The same must be made within 30 days from the end of the semester when the first unsatisfactory rating was given;
4. The notice should contain a warning that a succeeding unsatisfactory performance shall warrant his separation from the service; and
5. The notice shall contain sufficient information to enable the employee to prepare an explanation.

For those who are suffering from illness, upon being given notice, dropping of rolls is justified based on the following:

1. When the employee concerned has been continuously absent for 1 year, the head of the head of the office, in the exercise of sound judgment, may declare him physically unfit to perform his duties, drop him from the rolls;
2. When the employee concerned has been intermittently absent for at least 260 days in any given 24-month period may likewise be declared physically unfit and may be dropped from the rolls;

When an employee behaves abnormally, and manifests continuing mental disorder and incapacity to work, as reported by his superiors/co-workers, and confirmed by a competent physician, he may be dropped from the rolls.

---

All rights reserved.