GR 249135; (January, 2023) (Digest)
G.R. No. 249135 . January 11, 2023
DR. PETER STEPHEN S. SAMONTE, PETITIONER, VS. ANTONIO B. JUMAWAK, MARINA M. TINONGA, NESTOR I. EPO, CORNELIO R. TABAD, SAMUEL L. EMIA, ARFEL D. DAAN, OMAR G. BAYRON, WILLIE JAMES A. WONG, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY OMBUDSMAN FOR MINDANAO AND ROBERTO Y. UY, PROVINCIAL GOVERNOR, PROVINCE OF ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE, RESPONDENTS.
FACTS
The case stemmed from a Joint Complaint-Affidavit filed by several complainants against Dr. Peter Stephen S. Samonte (petitioner), the Municipal Health Officer of Katipunan, Zamboanga del Norte, and other municipal officers for Grave Misconduct, Gross Neglect of Duty, and Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service concerning alleged unliquidated cash advances. The Office of the Ombudsman initially dismissed the administrative case (OMB-M-A-12-0225) without prejudice due to insufficient evidence and absence of Commission on Audit (COA) findings, and ordered a COA special audit. The COA submitted a Final Evaluation Report dated February 16, 2015, showing petitioner obtained a total of P173,615.00 in cash advances from January 1999 to 2011, with an unliquidated balance of P27,500.00 as of February 2015, and found violations of laws and rules on cash advances, leading to the redocketing of the case as OMB-M-A-15-0148. Petitioner denied the charges, claiming full liquidation as evidenced by a Certification dated June 16, 2015 from the Municipal Accountant. The Ombudsman found petitioner administratively liable as charged, imposing the penalty of dismissal. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Ombudsman’s Decision. Petitioner elevated the case to the Supreme Court via a Rule 45 petition.
ISSUE
1. Whether the Court of Appeals committed a reversible error in affirming the Ombudsman’s Decision finding petitioner liable for Grave Misconduct, Gross Neglect of Duty, and Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service.
2. Whether the penalty of dismissal from service imposed by the Ombudsman is too harsh.
RULING
The Supreme Court GRANTED the petition. It found petitioner liable not for Grave Misconduct, Gross Neglect of Duty, or Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service, but only for Simple Misconduct.
1. On the first issue, the Court held that while there was substantial evidence of petitioner’s failure to comply with laws and regulations governing cash advances—specifically, Presidential Decree No. 1445, Republic Act No. 7160 , and relevant COA Circulars regarding the timely liquidation and documentation of cash advances for travel—these violations did not establish the additional elements of corruption, willful intent to violate the law, or flagrant disregard of established rules required for Grave Misconduct. The Court considered the nature of petitioner’s heavy workload as Municipal Health Officer of Katipunan and concurrently as designated Rural Health Physician of Roxas, Zamboanga del Norte, which, while not excusing non-compliance, negated the presence of corrupt or willful intent.
2. On the second issue, the Court modified the penalty. Finding petitioner liable only for Simple Misconduct, and considering it was his first offense, the Court imposed the penalty of suspension for six (6) months and one (1) day, in lieu of dismissal. The Court ordered petitioner’s reinstatement, but without payment of back salaries for the period of his suspension, as the suspension was imposed as a penalty for the offense, not as a preventive measure.