G.R. No. 228509 , October 14, 2019
CAPT. JOMAR B. DAQUIOAG, PETITIONER, V. OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN AND HADJI SALAM M. ALABAIN, RESPONDENTS.

FACTS

On August 10, 2008, a group including Hadja Nihma Alabain, her grandson Qamar Mujanil, and farm workers, including Robert Alviar (who died) and Jaivin Palces (injured), were fired upon by patrolling Philippine Marine soldiers while returning from a farm in Lamitan, Basilan. The complainants alleged that despite one of them raising his hands and shouting “civilian,” the soldiers fired. Hadja Alabain identified Capt. Jomar B. Daquioag as the leader of the soldiers. A complaint was filed with the Commission on Human Rights (CHR), which recommended filing charges. The Office of the Ombudsman for the Military and Other Law Enforcement Offices (OMB-MOLEO) found Capt. Daquioag guilty of grave misconduct and ordered his dismissal. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision. Capt. Daquioag petitioned the Supreme Court, arguing he was the Civil Military Officer (CMO) prohibited from armed combat and was not present during the incident. He presented affidavits from his commanding officer and another officer attesting he was not involved in the firefight and only later accompanied superiors to the scene. He also highlighted a joint affidavit of desistance executed by the complainants in August 2011, stating they were mistaken in identifying him as the leader after seeing his documentary evidence during criminal proceedings.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in upholding the finding of grave misconduct against Capt. Daquioag and ordering his dismissal from the service.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversed the Court of Appeals, and dismissed the complaint. The Court held that the identification of Capt. Daquioag by Hadja Alabain was insufficient and unreliable. Her affidavit did not detail when or how she identified him, nor did it state he was among the firing soldiers; it only mentioned him once in a concluding statement. None of her companions corroborated her identification. In contrast, Capt. Daquioag’s defense, supported by detailed affidavits from his commanding officer and a fellow officer, established that as the CMO, he was not involved in combat operations and was not present during the firefight. The joint affidavit of desistance, wherein the complainants recanted their identification after reviewing evidence, further undermined the case against him. The Court found the OMB-MOLEO and CA’s reliance on Hadja Alabain’s statement was not supported by substantial evidence. Consequently, there was no proof Capt. Daquioag committed grave misconduct.