G.R. No. L-75025 September 14, 1993
VICENTE GARCIA, petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE CHAIRMAN, COMMISSION ON AUDIT, THE HONORABLE MINISTER, LAND TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS, THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, TELECOM REGIONAL OFFICE NO. IV, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Vicente Garcia was a Supervising Lineman in the Bureau of Telecommunications. On April 1, 1975, he was summarily dismissed from service for dishonesty in an administrative case (Adm. Case No. 975) concerning the loss of telegraph poles. He did not appeal this decision. A criminal case for qualified theft based on the same facts was filed against him. On January 23, 1980, the trial court acquitted him, finding him innocent of the charge and commending his dedication. Petitioner sought reinstatement based on his acquittal, but his request was denied by the Bureau of Telecommunications on April 7, 1980. He then pleaded for executive clemency from the President. On August 26, 1981, by authority of the President, executive clemency was granted to petitioner based on favorable recommendations from the Ministry of Transportation and Communications and the Civil Service Commission, which cited the trial court’s finding of his innocence. Petitioner was recalled to service on March 12, 1984. He filed a claim with the Commission on Audit (COA) for back salaries from April 1, 1975 (date of dismissal) to March 12, 1984 (date of reinstatement). The COA denied his claim, stating the executive clemency was silent on back wages and he did not render service during that period. Petitioner’s appeal to the Office of the President was denied, citing the Supreme Court as the proper forum.

ISSUE

Whether petitioner is entitled to payment of back wages after having been reinstated pursuant to a grant of executive clemency based on his innocence.

RULING

Yes, the petition is GRANTED. The Supreme Court reversed and set aside the COA decision and ordered public respondents to pay petitioner his full back salaries from April 1, 1975, to March 12, 1984. The Court ruled that the executive clemency granted to petitioner, which was based on a finding of his innocence by the trial court, partook of the nature of an executive pardon. A pardon based on innocence affirms that innocence and completely obliterates the adverse effects of the administrative decision. It results in automatic reinstatement, restoring the individual to his office ipso facto without need for reapplication. Consequently, automatic reinstatement entitles the individual to back wages. The award is meant to afford relief and make reparation for the unjust dismissal, aligning with the intention of the clemency to give justice. The Court distinguished this case from those where back wages are limited, as petitioner’s reinstatement was not due to lack of proof but a finding that he did not commit the offense. Law, equity, and justice dictate the award of full back wages without deduction.