Case Digest (G.R. No. 230865)
Facts:
PSUPT. Job F. Marasigan v. Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for the Military and Other Law Enforcement Offices et al., G.R. Nos. 230865 and 238934, October 23, 2024, Supreme Court Second Division, Lopez, M., J., writing for the Court.In 2009 the Philippine National Police (PNP) National Headquarters Bids and Awards Committee (NHQ BAC) issued Resolutions authorizing the procurement of sixteen police coastal crafts (PCCs) and delegating the conduct of the public bidding to the PNP Maritime Group BAC (PNP MG BAC), subject to acceptance by an Inspection and Acceptance Committee (IAC) created for that purpose or as determined by the NHQ BAC. The PNP MG formed its own BAC (with respondents PSSUPT Cornelio Salinas, PSUPT Nepomuceno Corpus, Jr., and PSSUPT Michael Amos Filart among its members) but did not create a dedicated IAC; no NHQ BAC resolution authorized any other entity to perform the end-user inspection and acceptance.
After the 2009 typhoons (Ondoy, Pepeng and subsequent storms) National Defense and PAGASA advisories, the PNP MG BAC conducted negotiations on November 27, 2009. Two bidders appeared but one was disqualified, leaving Four Petals Trading as the sole participant. With no existing NAPOLCOM specifications for PCCs at the time, the PNP MG BAC applied existing NAPOLCOM motorized banca particulars. The PNP MG BAC issued an undated resolution recommending emergency negotiated purchase; a contract was executed and a purchase order issued on December 29, 2009.
On January 26, 2010, NAPOLCOM adopted updated engine specifications for PCCs. The supplier delivered the crafts on March 22, 2010. The PNP Maritime Group still had no IAC; nonetheless, a delivery receipt bore a stamp indicating an inspection by the Directorate for Comptrollership Management Division and a marginal note that some requirements were lacking. On March 26, 2010, a Logistics Support Services (LSS) IAC issued Resolution No. 2010-46 attesting to conformity with NAPOLCOM Resolution No. 2010-065 and accepting the crafts; the resolution was signed by Police Superintendent Job F. Marasigan as chair. Critical chronological discrepancies existed: Marasigan’s reassignment to the LSS was dated March 22, 2010, his formal reassignment dated April 6, 2010, and his designation as LSS IAC chair was effective April 26, 2010—after the March 26 attestation.
Subsequent COA and DRD reports (August–October 2010) found the crafts had diesel, not gasoline engines, lacked gauges and other fixtures, and required repairs; Four Petals failed to rectify defects despite repeated requests, and the PNP MG BAC later moved to rescind the contract. Multiple complaints alleging violations of R.A. No. 3019 and administrative charges followed; the Ombudsman’s Consolidated Resolution dated June 2, 2015 found probable cause for grave misconduct and dismissed respondents, including PSSUPT Salinas et al. and PSUPT Marasigan. Motions for reconsideration before the Ombudsman were denied.
PSSUPT Salinas et al. and PSUPT Marasigan separately sought relief from the Court of Appeals (CA). In CA-G.R. SP No. 145739 the CA (Jan. 30, 2018) exonerated PSSUPT Salinas et al., holding negotiated procurement justified by calamity and Four Petals a supplier in good standing. In CA-G.R. SP No. 142847 the CA (Nov. 24, 2016) aff...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- May the Supreme Court re-examine factual findings where the Court of Appeals and the Office of the Ombudsman reach conflicting conclusions?
- Did PSSUPT Cornelio R. Salinas, PSUPT Nepomuceno M. Corpus, Jr., and PSSUPT Michael Amos S. Filart (PNP MG BAC members) commit administrative misconduct in the procurement of the sixteen police coastal crafts?
- Did PSUPT Job F. Marasigan, as chairperson of the PNP LSS IAC, commit grave misconduct in inspecting...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)