Case Digest (G.R. No. 165132)
Facts:
Office of the Ombudsman v. Nellie R. Apolonio, G.R. No. 165132, March 07, 2012, Supreme Court Second Division, Brion, J., writing for the Court.
The petitioner is the Office of the Ombudsman; the respondent is Dr. Nellie R. Apolonio, who served as Executive Officer of the National Book Development Board (NBDB) from 1996 until her retirement on August 26, 2002. In December 2000 the NBDB Governing Board approved a two-day team‑building workshop for staff scheduled for December 20–21, 2000; pursuant to DBM National Budget Circular No. 442 the NBDB disbursed P108,000 to cover the standard P900 per participant per day allowance (P1,800 per participant for 60 employees).
Prior to the workshop several employees requested that part of their allowance be given to them in cash instead of being spent entirely on seminar expenses. Respondent consulted Rogelio Montealto, NBDB Finance and Administrative Chief; concluding the proposal acceptable, she approved the request. After the workshop SM gift cheques were purchased and distributed to participants in lieu of a portion of the approved allowance; Dr. Apolonio herself also received a gift cheque.
On August 24, 2001, NBDB consultant Nicasio I. Marte filed an administrative complaint before the Ombudsman alleging grave misconduct, dishonesty and conduct prejudicial to the service for the unauthorized purchase and disbursement of the gift cheques and for failing to liquidate the funds properly. Graft Investigation Officer (GIO) Plaridel Bohol found only conduct prejudicial to the service and recommended suspension for six months and one day; GIO Julita Calderon, however, later found Dr. Apolonio and Montealto guilty of gross or grave misconduct and dishonesty and recommended dismissal. Acting Ombudsman Margarito Gervacio, Jr. approved GIO Calderon’s recommendation and on August 21, 2002 signed the decision dismissing Dr. Apolonio; his denial of her motion for reconsideration followed on September 18, 2002.
Dr. Apolonio petitioned the Court of Appeals (CA) under Rule 43, and on March 23, 2004 the CA in CA‑G.R. SP No. 73357 granted the petition: it annulled the Ombudsman’s dismissal, held that the Ombudsman possessed only recommendatory power under Section 13(3), Article XI of the Constitution, and concluded that respondent lacked corrupt intent or personal gain so that her acts amounted only to conduct prejudicial to the best interest ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Does the Office of the Ombudsman have the power to directly impose the penalty of removal from office against public officials?
- Do Dr. Nellie R. Apolonio’s acts in realigning workshop funds for gift cheques constitute grave misconduct (or dishonesty) as ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)