G.R. No. 129914 . May 12, 2000.
NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION (NAPOLCOM) NATIONAL APPELLATE BOARD (SECOND DIVISION) and PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE (PNP), petitioners, vs. POLICE CHIEF INSPECTOR LEONARDO BERNABE, respondent.

FACTS

This case originated from a newspaper article alleging that Police Chief Inspector Leonardo Bernabe headed a syndicate fraudulently encashing treasury warrants of deceased, AWOL, or separated military and police personnel. President Fidel V. Ramos directed an investigation. The PNP’s Criminal Investigation Service Command (CISC) investigated and found that Bernabe had been previously charged in 1989 with multiple counts of Estafa through Falsification involving 376 treasury warrants, with some cases pending before the Sandiganbayan and the Ombudsman. The investigation also reported his possession of unexplained wealth.
Bernabe was placed under preventive suspension and formally charged. He submitted an affidavit answering the charges and filed a motion for a bill of particulars, which was denied. The Summary Dismissal Hearing Officer recommended his dismissal, which was concurred with by the PNP Inspector General and ordered by the PNP Chief. Bernabe appealed to the NAPOLCOM National Appellate Board, which affirmed the dismissal. The Court of Appeals, however, set aside the dismissal, ordering Bernabe’s reinstatement and payment of back salaries, finding a denial of due process.

ISSUE

Whether the dismissal of Police Chief Inspector Leonardo Bernabe from the PNP service violated his right to due process.

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the dismissal. The Court held that the requirements of due process in administrative proceedings were sufficiently complied with. Due process in this context does not necessitate a trial-type proceeding; its essence is the opportunity to be heard. The record established that Bernabe was duly notified of the charges against him. He exercised his right to explain by submitting a detailed affidavit answering the allegations point by point. Furthermore, he availed himself of the opportunity to seek reconsideration by appealing the PNP Chief’s decision to the National Appellate Board, where he submitted a memorandum. These steps provided him more than an adequate opportunity to present his defense. Consequently, there was no violation of his procedural and substantive due process rights. The Court found the dismissal for grave misconduct and conduct unbecoming a police officer, based on the substantial evidence of his involvement in the warrant encashment syndicate and unexplained wealth, to be in order.