G.R. No. 109638 - Fianza vs. People's Law Enforcement Board

Petitioner Supt. Florencio D. Fianza was assigned as Provincial Director of the PNP for Benguet, which includes the City of Baguio, with headquarters at Camp Dangwa, La Trinidad, Benguet.
Respondent policemen, comprising SPO3 Jesus Mason, SPO3 Fernando Tafaleng, PO3 Octavio Pawingi, PO3 Ferdinand Segundo, PO3 Metodio Aquino, PO3 Benjamin Nakigo, PO3 Salvador Galiste, PO3 Romeo Bautista, and PO3 Alfredo Matias, were assigned to the Baguio City Police Station.
On June 19, 1992, these policemen filed an Amended Complaint with the Baguio People’s Law Enforcement Board (PLEB) alleging “Grave Misconduct and Irregularity in the Performance of Duty” committed by Supt. Fianza.
The complaint also implicated Supt. Camilo S. Dugayen as having acted by issuing illegal and irregular orders, though he was not a party to the petition.

On January 13, 1992, Supt. Camilo S. Dugayen allegedly issued Special Order No. 04-92 which dropped several police personnel from the rolls of the Baguio City Police Station, reportedly without due process.

The order allegedly followed a directive from Supt. Fianza to effect a transfer of specific personnel from the Baguio City Police Station to the Mankayan Police Station.

On January 18, 1992, Dugayen is further alleged to have issued Special Order No. 06-92 affecting additional personnel by dropping them from the rolls, again without a formal investigation.

The underlying directive, as alleged, involved transferring designated policemen to various stations (Kibungan, Tuba, and Baguias) based on Fianza’s orders.

The respondents contended that the illegal and irregular issuance of orders was motivated by retaliation against their raids on jueteng operations—implying that these assignments and dismissals were influenced by ulterior motives.

Contended that the complaint, being strictly an internal organizational matter involving transfers, reassignments, and personnel disciplinary measures, is outside the competence of the PLEB.
Argued that the PLEB is designed to hear “citizen’s complaints” against erring PNP members, and that complaints by PNP personnel about internal orders should not be classified as citizen’s complaints.
Asserted that matters such as the issuance of illegal orders are within the exclusive control of the PNP chain-of-command under Republic Act No. 6975 and, thus, should be decided internally.

Maintained that the complaint qualifies as a “citizen’s complaint” since the complainants, despite their status as PNP members, remain citizens and have the right to seek redress as any private citizen.
Emphasized that the law does not preclude PNP personnel from bringing complaints in their capacity as citizens.
Asserted that, particularly in cases involving grave misconduct (e.g., protecting jueteng operations or making threats), a civilian body like the PLEB is an appropriate forum.

A separate but consolidated petition arose in which petitioner Supt. Cordoviz was accused of “Threats, Grave Abuse of Authority, and Conduct Unbecoming an Officer” for allegedly threatening a policeman, who was not under his command.
Similar to the Fianza case, the fundamental issue was whether such complaints, being internal in nature, fell under the jurisdiction of the PLEB or should be directed to the proper PNP chain-of-command.

The Baguio PLEB, in an order dated November 13, 1992, ruled that it had jurisdiction to hear Administrative Case No. 007-92, treating the complaint as a citizen’s complaint.
Following petitioner’s request, the matter was referred by the PLEB to the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM) for an opinion on jurisdiction, with the Acting Regional Director supporting the PLEB’s stance that the term “citizen’s complaint” is not limited solely to complaints by non-government employees.
Petitions for prohibition and declaratory relief with a prayer for a temporary restraining order were filed by petitioners Fianza and Cordoviz to halt the PLEB’s proceedings over what they contended were internal disciplinary issues beyond the PLEB’s jurisdiction.

Whether the People’s Law Enforcement Board (PLEB) has jurisdiction to entertain complaints issued by PNP personnel against their superiors when such complaints involve internal organizational matters such as transfers, reassignments, and dismissals.

Whether the complaints brought by the respondent policemen can be classified as “citizen’s complaints” under the law, given that they were filed by PNP members who are simultaneously government employees and citizens, or whether they intrinsically constitute internal disciplinary grievances proper for adjudication within the PNP chain-of-command.

Whether matters involving alleged “illegal or irregular orders”—including the issue of orders allegedly issued in retaliation for anti-illegal activities—should be resolved by the PLEB or be left to internal mechanisms within the PNP as stipulated by Republic Act No. 6975 and its corresponding implementing rules and regulations.