Title
Civil Service Commission vs. Ledesma
Case
G.R. No. 154521
Decision Date
Sep 30, 2005
A 32-year Bureau of Immigration clerk, accused of misconduct for mishandling passports and fees, was found guilty of simple misconduct, not grave misconduct, due to lack of corrupt intent and her long, unblemished service.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 170984)

Facts:

# Background

Juliana E. Ledesma, a Clerk III at the Bureau of Immigration with over 32 years of service, was elected chair of the employees' union, Buklod ng mga Kawani ng CID, for three consecutive terms.

# The Incident

On 15 March 1999, Taiwanese nationals Steve Tsai and his sister Ching Tsai sought Ledesma's assistance in obtaining Emigrant Certificate Clearances (ECCs). Steve Tsai gave Ledesma P3,000 and their passports. Ledesma allegedly promised to provide the ECCs by 17 March 1999 but failed to do so. On 19 March 1999, Ledesma provided the ECCs but retained the passports, preventing the Tsai siblings from leaving for their vacation.

# Administrative Case

On 20 March 1999, the Tsai siblings executed complaint-affidavits against Ledesma, accusing her of misconduct. Ledesma was administratively charged with dishonesty, grave misconduct, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service. Despite her claims of innocence and procedural objections, the Bureau of Immigration found her guilty and dismissed her from service. The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Civil Service Commission (CSC) upheld this decision.

# Evidence

Ledesma admitted receiving P3,000 but claimed it was for a travel agent. She submitted a sworn statement from Lilian Leonor, a Liaison Officer, who corroborated her version of events. However, the CSC dismissed Leonor's statement as unreliable.

# Court of Appeals Decision

The Court of Appeals downgraded Ledesma's offense from grave misconduct to simple misconduct, citing her 32 years of unblemished service and absence of corrupt intent. The court suspended her for six months and ordered her reinstatement with backwages.

Issues:

  • Whether the Court of Appeals erred in downgrading Ledesma's offense from grave misconduct to simple misconduct.
  • Whether the Court of Appeals failed to address the charge of dishonesty against Ledesma.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)
Unlock Full Case Digest

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.

About Privacy Terms