Case Digest (A.M. No. CA-18-35-P)
Facts:
Ricky R. Regala v. Enrique E. Manabat, Jr., A.M. No. CA-18-35-P (Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 17-260-CA-P), November 27, 2018, Supreme Court En Banc, Per Curiam. The complaint arose from the Court of Appeals’ Security Committee investigation after Acting Chief of Security Ricky R. Regala reported that on November 15, 2013 Security Guard I Enrique E. Manabat, Jr. asked permission to go to the Philippine General Hospital (PGH) for scheduled physical therapy but thereafter his post was found unmanned; inquiries with PGH showed he never attended the scheduled session. Regala also reported that Manabat was absent without official leave from November 19–22, 2013. Regala recommended dismissal.On January 21, 2016 the Court of Appeals Clerk of Court filed a Formal Charge against Manabat for Simple Neglect of Duty and Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service and directed him to answer under oath. In his March 11, 2016 counter-affidavit Manabat claimed a family emergency (related to a Typhoon Yolanda victim) required him to fetch a relative and later to assist his wife in comforting that relative; he said these events caused him to forget to log out and to fail to notify superiors. He initially sought a formal investigation but withdrew documentary/testimonial evidence during the preliminary conference and both parties submitted memoranda.
The Court of Appeals Clerk of Court, in a May 30, 2017 Report and Recommendation, found Manabat failed to notify superiors, left his post unmanned, and—based on complainant’s evidence that Manabat did not in fact attend PGH—recommended dismissal, noting a prior finding of simple neglect. The matter was referred to the Supreme Court (Indorsement dated July 11, 2017 by then-Presiding Justice Andres B. Reyes, Jr.), and on August 1, 2017 the Court referred the case to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) for evaluation.
The OCA’s August 24, 2017 Report and Recommendation agreed Manabat was guilty of simple neglect of duty and conduct prejudicial to the service, and recommended dismissal considering his prior disciplinary record. The Supreme Court, after reviewing the records and OCA report, found Manabat g...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was respondent Enrique E. Manabat, Jr. guilty of neglect of duty and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service?
- If guilty, was dismissal from the service an appropriate penalty given respondent’s record and ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)