Title
Supreme Court
Re: Illegal and Unauthorized Digging and Excavation Activities Inside the Supreme Court Compound, Baguio City
Case
A.M. No. 2016-03-SC, 16-06-07-SC
Decision Date
Feb 21, 2017
Unauthorized treasure-hunting excavations at SC Baguio Compound led to grave misconduct charges against workers and neglect of duty against supervising officer, resulting in dismissals and suspension.

Case Summary (A.M. No. 2016-03-SC, 16-06-07-SC)

Complaint Allegations

The complaint, filed on January 6, 2016, accused Engr. Sanchez and Hallera of grave misconduct related to unauthorized excavation activities intended to search for hidden treasures. The excavations were reportedly conducted near the cottages of Associate Justices Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr. and Martin S. Villarama, Jr. Carbonel claimed that these activities compromised the structural integrity of the cottages.

Initial Investigation Findings

Following the complaint, the Office of Administrative Services (OAS) dispatched an investigative team to the site on January 8, 2016. The team did not initially observe signs of excavation but recommended a formal inquiry after discovering that Hallera had concealed a hole on the property. On January 11, 2016, Sanchez and Hallera were given a copy of the complaint and asked to respond, which they both did on January 14, 2016, denying any wrongdoing.

National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Involvement

A separate investigation was conducted by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) at the request of Associate Justice Marvic Mario Victor F. Leonen. The NBI’s Final Report, issued on June 7, 2016, identified two excavation sites associated with the complaint. Evidence indicated that Hallera and Carbonel engaged in treasure-hunting activities in 2013-2014, while Sanchez was implicated in ongoing activities near Cottage J.

NBI's Recommendations

The NBI suggested charges against all three individuals, specifically for violating Section 48 of Republic Act No. 10066, the National Cultural Heritage Act of 2009. They posited that their actions were not just unauthorized, but undermined the integrity of judicial facilities, warranting severe disciplinary measures.

OAS Report and Recommendations

On September 19, 2016, the OAS issued a Consolidated Report that upheld the NBI's findings regarding Hallera and Carbonel, recommending their dismissal for grave misconduct. However, the allegation against Engr. Sanchez was deemed unsubstantiated, primarily due to insufficient corroborative evidence.

Court's Ruling on Administrative Liability

Upon review, the Court confirmed the findings against Hallera and Carbonel, determining that their actions amounted to grave misconduct. The Court defined misconduct as any significant deviation from the expected conduct of a public officer, especially when involving unlawful behavior. Their unauthorized actions directly impinged upon the integrity of the Supreme Court and were executed covertly without authorization.

Penalties Imposed

The Court ruled that the appropriate penalty for both Hallera and Carbonel was immediate termination of their employment due to the severity of their offe

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.