G.R. No. L-45101 - Maguan vs. Court of Appeals

Parties and Procedural History
Petitioner Geronimo S. Rosas, Regional Director of the Bureau of Immigration (BI) Mactan International Airport Station, filed a petition for review on certiorari before the Supreme Court assailing:

The Court of Appeals’ (CA) March 9, 2012 Decision and October 16, 2012 Resolution in CA-G.R. SP No. 05497.
The CA had affirmed the Office of the Ombudsman’s (OMB) March 2, 2007 Decision and July 4, 2008 Order in OMB-V-A-05-0036-A finding Rosas guilty of grave misconduct.

Respondents Dilausan M. Montor and Imra-Ali M. Sabdullah, BI Cebu employees, filed before the OMB a Complaint-Affidavit (January 18, 2005) charging Rosas, and two security guards, Elmer Napilot and Jose Ramon Ugarte, with grave misconduct under Section 3(e) of RA 3019 and conduct prejudicial to public service.

Facts Leading to the Complaint
December 7, 2004: Iranian nationals Jafar Saketi Taromsari and Jalal Shokr Pour Ziveh arrived at Mactan-Cebu International Airport (MCIA) using tampered Italian and Mexican passports under false names.
December 14–16, 2004: They flew to Narita, Japan, were caught using counterfeit passports, denied entry, and returned to MCIA at 6:45 PM on December 16, where they were detained by BI.
December 15, 2004: Rosas submitted a Memorandum to BI Commissioner Fernandez reporting the detainees’ admissions of buying fraudulent passports, recommending their exclusion and blacklisting under Section 29(a)(17) of the Philippine Immigration Act (PIA).
Exclusion Order issued on grounds of “Not Properly Documented” and “No Entry Visa”; on December 17, 2004 Rosas directed Napilot and Ugarte to escort the Iranians for deportation.
December 19, 2004: Taromsari and Ziveh were deported to Tehran via Kuala Lumpur on Malaysian Airlines Flight.

OMB, CA, and SC Proceedings
Rosas denied liability, claiming he lacked knowledge of the Iranians’ prior entry and that exclusion orders are the examining officers’ function.
OMB Decision (March 2, 2007): Found Rosas guilty of grave misconduct—manifest partiality, bad faith, gross negligence—for releasing the Iranians without initiating deportation proceedings; imposed dismissal. Napilot and Ugarte acquitted. Motion for reconsideration denied.
CA Decision (March 9, 2012): Affirmed OMB, holding Rosas failed to initiate deportation and criminal proceedings under Section 37(a)(9) of PIA in relation to Sections 45 and 46. Reconsideration denied.
SC petition raises whether substantial evidence supports the grave misconduct finding and Rosas’s dismissal.

Core Issue
Whether there is substantial evidence to sustain the finding of grave misconduct warranting Rosas’s dismissal for releasing the two Iranian nationals without initiating deportation and criminal proceedings despite knowledge of their use of fraudulent passports.

Subsidiary Questions (Assignment of Errors)
Can Rosas be validly sanctioned with dismissal for acts of subordinate immigration officers under a valid exclusion order?
Was there evidence that Rosas gave unwarranted benefits or acted with corrupt motives in recommending exclusion?
Was the initiation of deportation and criminal proceedings exclusively within the Commissioner of Immigration’s prerogative?
Was the delay or manner of exclusion irregular absent factual and legal basis?
Did the CA err in disregarding evidence of Rosas’s lack of involvement or misconduct?