Republic of the Philippines

Supreme Court
Baguio City

EN BANC

ATTY. VICENTE E. SALUMBIDES,
JR., and GLENDA ARAA,
Petitioners,




- versus -




OICE O T!E OMBUDSMAN,
RICARDO AGON, RAMON
VILLASANTA, ELMER DI"ON,
SALVADOR ADUL, and AGNES
ABIAN,
Respondents,

G.R. N#. $%&'$(

Present:

PUNO, C.J.,
CARPIO,
CORONA,
CARPIO ORA!"S,
#"!ASCO, $R%,
NAC&URA,
!"ONAR'O('" CAS)RO,
BRION,
P"RA!)A,
B"RSAIN,
'"! CAS)I!!O,
ABA',
#I!!ARAA, $R%,
P"R"*, an+
"N'O*A, JJ%

Promulgate+:

April ,-, ,./.
0( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( 0

D E C I S I O N

CAR)IO MORALES, J.*

Petitioners #icente Salumbi+es, $r% 1Salumbi+es2 an+ 3len+a Ara4a 13len+a2
challenge the October //, ,..5 'ecision an+ the 'ecember /-, ,..5 Resolution of the
Court of Appeals6/7 in CA(3%R% SP No% 89::8 affirming the Office of the Ombu+sman;s
+ecision fin+ing them guilty of Simple Neglect of 'uty%

Salumbi+es an+ 3len+a <ere appointe+ in $uly ,../ as unicipal !egal
Officer=A+ministrator an+ unicipal Bu+get Officer, respecti>ely, of )ag?a<ayan,
@ueAon%

)o<ar+s the en+ of ,../, ayor #icente Salumbi+es III 1the mayor2 sa< the urgent
nee+ to construct a t<o(classroom buil+ing <ith fence 1the proBects2 for the )ag?a<ayan
unicipal &igh School6,7 1)&S2 since the public school in the poblacion area <oul+
no longer a+mit high school freshmen starting school year ,..,(,..-% On ho< to sol>e
the classroom shortage, the mayor consulte+ Salumbi+es <ho suggeste+ that the
construction of the t<o(classroom buil+ing be charge+ to the account of the
aintenance an+ Other Operating "0penses= Repair an+ aintenance of Cacilities
1OO"=RC2 an+ implemente+ Dby a+ministration,E as ha+ been +one in a pre>ious
classroom buil+ing proBect of the former mayor%

Upon consultation, 3len+a a+>ise+ Salumbi+es in 'ecember ,../, that there <ere no
more a>ailable fun+s that coul+ be ta?en from the OO"=RC, but the sa>ings of the
municipal go>ernment <ere a+eFuate to fun+ the proBects% She a++e+, ho<e>er, that the
appro>al by the Sangguniang Bayan of a propose+ supplemental bu+get must be
secure+%

)he members of the Sangguniang Bayan ha>ing alrea+y gone on recess for the
Christmas holi+ays, 3len+a an+ Salumbi+es a+>ise+ the mayor to source the fun+s from
the P/,...,... OO"=RC allocation in the appro>e+ unicipal Annual Bu+get for
,..,%6-7

)he mayor thus or+ere+ on $anuary :, ,.., unicipal "ngineer $ose AFuino 1AFuino2
to procee+ <ith the construction of the proBects base+ on the program of <or? an+ bill of
materials he 1AFuino2 prepare+ <ith a total cost estimate of P,,,,...%

Upon a+>ice of unicipal Planning an+ 'e>elopment Officer &ernan $ason 1$ason2, the
mayor inclu+e+ the proBects in the list of local go>ernment proBects sche+ule+ for
bi++ing on $anuary ,G, ,.., <hich, together <ith the $anuary -/, ,.., public bi++ing,
faile+%

)he mayor <as to a+mit later his e0pectation or assumption of ris? on reimbursement:

0 0 0 It <as my thin?ing that e>en if a bi++er emerges an+ gets these , proBects <hich <ere at the time
on(going 1although it <as also my thin?ing then that no bi++er <oul+ possibly bi+ for these , proBects
as these <ere cost(estimate+ >ery lo<(P/G.,... for the ,(room school buil+ing P5,,... for the
fencing2 he 1bi++er2 <oul+ be reasonable enough to reimburse <hat I ha+ so far spen6t7 for the proBect%
I sai+ DIE because up to the time of the faile+ , bi++ings I ha>e shoul+ere+ the D>aleE of the laborers
an+ I reFuisitione+ some materials on cre+it on my o<n personal account, an+ not a single centa>o <as
at the time +isburse+ by our municipal treasury until all reFuirements for negotiate+ purchase of the
materials for the proBect ha+ been accomplishe+% As a matter of fact, payments for the e0penses on
these , proBects ha>e been ma+e only starting /8 arch ,..,% 0 0 06H7 1un+erscoring
supplie+2


)he construction of the proBects commence+ <ithout any appro>e+ appropriation an+
ahea+ of the public bi++ing% Salumbi+es <as of the opinion that the proBects <ere
regular an+ legal, base+ on an earlier proBect that <as Dimplemente+ in the same manner,
using the same source of fun+ an+ for the same reason of urgencyE <hich <as allo<e+
Dbecause the buil+ing <as consi+ere+ merely temporary as the )&S is set to be
transferre+ to an :(hectare lot <hich the municipal go>ernment is presently negotiating
to buy%E6G7
ean<hile, AFuino suggeste+ to the Sangguniang Bayan the a+option of Dmo+el
gui+elinesE in the implementation of infrastructure proBects to be e0ecute+ Dby
a+ministration,E <hile Councilor Coleta San+ro 1Coleta2 sponsore+ a Resolution to
ratify the proBects an+ to authoriAe the mayor to enter into a negotiate+ procurement%
Both actions +i+ not merit the appro>al of the Sangguniang Bayan%

On ay /-, ,..,, herein respon+ents Ricar+o Agon, Ramon #illasanta, "lmer 'iAon,
Sal>a+or A+ul an+ Agnes Cabian, all members of the Sangguniang Bayan of
)ag?a<ayan, file+ <ith the Office of the Ombu+sman a complaint697 against
Salumbi+es an+ 3len+a 1hereafter petitioners2, the mayor, Coleta, $ason an+ AFuino%

)he a+ministrati>e aspect of the case, +oc?ete+ as Case No% OB(!(A(.,(.,59(",
charge+ petitioners et al% <ith 'ishonesty, 3ra>e iscon+uct, 3ross Neglect of 'uty,
Con+uct PreBu+icial to the Best Interest of the Ser>ice, an+ >iolation of the Commission
on Au+it 1COA2 Rules an+ the !ocal 3o>ernment Co+e%

By Or+er of $une /H, ,..,, the Office of the Ombu+sman, +enie+ the prayer to
place petitioners et al% un+er pre>enti>e suspension pen+ing in>estigation% By Or+er
+ate+ Cebruary /, ,..G, appro>e+ on April //, ,..G, it +enie+ the motion for
reconsi+eration but +roppe+ the mayor an+ Coleta, both electi>e officials, as respon+ents
in the a+ministrati>e case, the ,..H elections ha>ing moote+ the case% )he parties <ere
thereupon +irecte+ to submit their respecti>e >erifie+ position papers to <hich
petitioners, $ason an+ AFuino complie+ by submitting a consoli+ate+ position paper on
ay /8, ,..G%
ean<hile, in response to the subpoena duces tecum issue+ by the Office of the
Ombu+sman on Cebruary /:, ,..G reFuiring the regional officer of the COA to submit
the post(au+it report on the proBects, Celerino Al>iar, COA State Au+itor II claime+ by
Affi+a>it of ay ,-, ,..G that the reFuire+ +ocuments <ere among those raAe+ by fire
on April /H, ,..H that hit the Office of the unicipal Accountant <here they <ere
temporarily store+ +ue to lac? of space at the Pro>incial Au+itor;s Office%

On October /5, ,..G, the Office of the Ombu+sman appro>e+ the September 8,
,..G emoran+um absol>ing $ason an+ AFuino, an+ fin+ing petitioners guilty of
Simple Neglect of 'uty, for <hich they <ere mete+ the penalty of suspension from
office for a ma0imum perio+ of si0 months <ith a stern <arning against a similar
repetition% It also appro>e+ on No>ember ,, ,..9 the arch ,5, ,..9 Or+er657 +enying
the motion for reconsi+eration%

)heir recourse to the appellate court ha>ing faile+, petitioners come before this Court >ia
Rule HG of the Rules of Court%

Cor non(compliance <ith the rule on certification against forum shopping, the petition
merits outright +ismissal% )he >erification portion of the petition +oes not carry a
certification against forum shopping%6:7

)he Court has +istinguishe+ the effects of non(compliance <ith the reFuirement of
>erification an+ that of certification against forum shopping% A defective verification
shall be treate+ as an unsigne+ plea+ing an+ thus pro+uces no legal effect, subBect to the
+iscretion of the court to allo< the +eficiency to be reme+ie+, <hile the failure to certify
against forum shopping shall be cause for +ismissal <ithout preBu+ice, unless other<ise
pro>i+e+, an+ is not curable by amen+ment of the initiatory plea+ing%687
Petitioners; +isregar+ of the rules <as not the first% )heir motion for e0tension of time to
file petition <as pre>iously +enie+ by Resolution of $anuary /G, ,..:6/.7 for non(
compliance <ith the reFuire+ sho<ing of competent proof of i+entity in the Affi+a>it of
Ser>ice% )he Court, by Resolution of arch H, ,..:,6//7 later grante+ their motion for
reconsi+eration <ith motion to a+mit appeal 1otion <ith Appeal2 that <as file+ on
Cebruary /:, ,..: or the last +ay of filing <ithin the e0ten+e+ perio+%

oreo>er, in their anifestation=otion6/,7 file+ a +ay later, petitioners praye+
only for the a+mission of nine a++itional copies of the otion <ith Appeal D+ue to
honest ina+>ertenceE in earlier filing an insufficient number of copies% Petitioners <ere
less than can+i+ <hen they surreptitiously submitte+ a otion <ith Appeal <hich is
+ifferent from the first set they ha+ submitte+% )he secon+ set of Appeal inclu+es
specific Assignment of "rrors6/-7 an+ alrea+y contains a certification against forum
shopping6/H7 embe++e+ in the #erification% )he t<o +ifferent #erifications <ere
notariAe+ by the same notary public an+ bear the same +ate an+ +ocument number%6/G7
)he rectifie+ >erification <ith certification, ho<e>er, <as file+ beyon+ the reglementary
perio+%

Its lapses asi+e, the petition Bust the same merits +enial%

Petitioners urge this Court to e0pan+ the settle+ +octrine of con+onation6/97 to
co>er coterminous appointi>e officials <ho <ere a+ministrati>ely charge+ along <ith
the reelecte+ official=appointing authority <ith infractions allege+ly committe+ +uring
their prece+ing term%

)he Court reBects petitioners; thesis%

ore than 9. years ago, the Court in Pascual v. Hon. Provincial Board of Nueva
Ecia6/57 issue+ the lan+mar? ruling that prohibits the +isciplining of an electi>e official
for a <rongful act committe+ +uring his imme+iately prece+ing term of office% )he
Court e0plaine+ that D6t7he un+erlying theory is that each term is separate from other
terms, an+ that the reelection to office operates as a con+onation of the officer;s pre>ious
miscon+uct to the e0tent of cutting off the right to remo>e him therefor%E6/:7

)he Court shoul+ ne>er remo>e a public officer for acts +one prior to his present term of office%
)o +o other<ise <oul+ be to +epri>e the people of their right to elect their officers% Ihen the people
elect6e7+ a man to office, it must be assume+ that they +i+ this <ith ?no<le+ge of his life an+ character,
an+ that they +isregar+e+ or forga>e his faults or miscon+uct, if he ha+ been guilty of any% It is not for
the court, by reason of such faults or miscon+uct6,7 to practically o>errule the <ill of the people%6/87
1un+erscoring supplie+2

!i"ares v. Hechanova, et al.6,.7 replicate+ the +octrine% )he Court +ismisse+ the
petition in that case for being moot, the therein petitioner Dha>ing been +uly reelecte+, is
no longer amenable to a+ministrati>e sanctions%E6,/7

#ngco v. Sanche", et al.6,,7 clarifie+ that the con+onation +octrine +oes not apply to a
criminal case%6,-7 !uciano v. $he Provincial %overnor, et al.,6,H7 &livare" v. Judge
'illalu",6,G7 an+ (guinaldo v. Santos6,97 echoe+ the Fualifie+ rule that reelection of a
public official +oes not bar prosecution for crimes committe+ by him prior thereto%

Consistently, the Court has reiterate+ the +octrine in a string of recent Burispru+ence
inclu+ing t<o cases in>ol>ing a Senator an+ a ember of the &ouse of Representati>es%
6,57

Salalima v. %uingona, Jr.6,:7 an+ )ayor %arcia v. Hon. )oica6,87 reinforce+ the
+octrine% )he con+onation rule <as applie+ e>en if the a+ministrati>e complaint <as not
file+ before the reelection of the public official, an+ e>en if the allege+ miscon+uct
occurre+ four +ays before the elections, respecti>ely% Salalima +i+ not +istinguish as to
the +ate of filing of the a+ministrati>e complaint, as long as the allege+ miscon+uct <as
committe+ +uring the prior term, the precise timing or perio+ of <hich %arcia +i+ not
further +istinguish, as long as the <rong+oing that ga>e rise to the public official;s
culpability <as committe+ prior to the +ate of reelection%

Petitioners; theory is not no>el%

A parallel Fuestion <as in>ol>e+ in Civil Service Commission v. Soor6-.7 <here
the Court foun+ no basis to broa+en the scope of the +octrine of con+onation:

!astly, Ie +o not agree <ith respon+ent;s contention that his appointment to the position of presi+ent
of NORSU, +espite the pen+ing a+ministrati>e cases against him, ser>e+ as a con+onation by the BOR
of the allege+ acts impute+ to him% )he +octrine this Court lai+ +o<n in Salalima v. %uingona, Jr. an+
(guinaldo v. Santos are inapplicable to the present circumstances% Respon+ents in the mentione+ cases
are electi>e officials, unli?e respon+ent here <ho is an appointe+ official% In+ee+, election e0presses
the so>ereign <ill of the people% Un+er the principle of vo* populi est suprema le*, +,e re-e-e.+/#n #0 a
1u2-/. #00/./a- 3a4, /ndeed, su1ersede a 1end/n5 ad3/n/s+ra+/ve .ase. T,e sa3e .ann#+ 2e sa/d #0
a re-a11#/n+3en+ +# a n#n-.areer 1#s/+/#n% )here is no so>ereign <ill of the people to spea? of <hen
the BOR re(appointe+ respon+ent SoBor to the post of uni>ersity presi+ent%6-/7 1emphasis an+
un+erscoring supplie+2

Contrary to petitioners; asse>eration, the non(application of the con+onation
+octrine to appointive officials +oes not >iolate the right to eFual protection of the la<%

In the recent case of +uinto v. Commission on Elections,6-,7 the Court applie+ the
four(fol+ test in an eFual protection challenge6--7 against the resign(to(run pro>ision,
<herein it +iscusse+ the material an+ substanti>e +istinctions bet<een electi>e an+
appointi>e officials that coul+ <ell apply to the +octrine of con+onation:

)he eFual protection of the la< clause is against un+ue fa>or an+ in+i>i+ual or class pri>ilege,
as <ell as hostile +iscrimination or the oppression of ineFuality% It is not inten+e+ to prohibit
legislation <hich is limite+ either in the obBect to <hich it is +irecte+ or by territory <ithin <hich it is
to operate% It +oes not +eman+ absolute eFuality among resi+entsJ it merely reFuires that all persons
shall be treate+ ali?e, un+er li?e circumstances an+ con+itions both as to pri>ileges conferre+ an+
liabilities enforce+% )he eFual protection clause is not infringe+ by legislation <hich applies only to
those persons falling <ithin a specifie+ class, if it applies ali?e to all persons <ithin such class, an+
reasonable groun+s e0ist for ma?ing a +istinction bet<een those <ho fall <ithin such class an+ those
<ho +o not%

Su2s+an+/a- d/s+/n.+/#ns .-ear-4 e6/s+ 2e+7een e-e.+/ve #00/./a-s and a11#/n+/ve #00/./a-s% )he
former occupy their office by >irtue of the man+ate of the electorate% )hey are electe+ to an office for a
+efinite term an+ may be remo>e+ therefrom only upon stringent con+itions% On the other han+,
appointi>e officials hol+ their office by >irtue of their +esignation thereto by an appointing authority%
Some appointi>e officials hol+ their office in a permanent capacity an+ are entitle+ to security of
tenure <hile others ser>e at the pleasure of the appointing authority%

0 0 0 0
An election is the embo+iment of the popular <ill, perhaps the purest e0pression of the
so>ereign po<er of the people% It in>ol>es the choice or selection of can+i+ates to public office by
popular >ote% Consi+ering that electe+ officials are put in office by their constituents for a +efinite
term, 0 0 0 complete +eference is accor+e+ to the <ill of the electorate that they be ser>e+ by such
officials until the en+ of the term for <hich they <ere electe+% In contrast, there is no such e0pectation
insofar as appointe+ officials are concerne+% 1emphasis an+ un+erscoring supplie+2


)he electorate;s con+onation of the pre>ious a+ministrati>e infractions of the
reelecte+ official cannot be e0ten+e+ to that of the reappointe+ coterminous employees,
the un+erlying basis of the rule being to uphol+ the <ill of the people e0presse+ through
the ballot% In other <or+s, there is neither sub>ersion of the so>ereign <ill nor
+isenfranchisement of the electorate to spea? of, in the case of reappointe+ coterminous
employees%

It is the <ill of the populace, not the <him of one person <ho happens to be the
appointing authority, that coul+ e0tinguish an a+ministrati>e liability% Since petitioners
hol+ appointi>e positions, they cannot claim the man+ate of the electorate% )he people
cannot be charge+ <ith the presumption of full ?no<le+ge of the life an+ character of
each an+ e>ery probable appointee of the electi>e official ahea+ of the latter;s actual
reelection%

oreo>er, the un<arrante+ e0pansion of the Pascual +octrine <oul+ set a
+angerous prece+ent as it <oul+, as respon+ents posit, pro>i+e ci>il ser>ants,
particularly local go>ernment employees, <ith blan?et immunity from a+ministrati>e
liability that <oul+ spa<n an+ bree+ abuse in the bureaucracy%

Asserting <ant of conspiracy, petitioners implore this Court to sift through the
e>i+ence an+ re(assess the factual fin+ings% )his the Court cannot +o, for being
improper an+ immaterial%

Un+er Rule HG of the Rules of Court, only Fuestions of la< may be raise+, since
the Court is not a trier of facts%6-H7 As a rule, the Court is not to re>ie< e>i+ence on
recor+ an+ assess the probati>e <eight thereof% In the present case, the appellate court
affirme+ the factual fin+ings of the Office of the Ombu+sman, <hich ren+ere+ the
factual Fuestions beyon+ the pro>ince of the Court%

oreo>er, as correctly obser>e+ by respon+ents, the lac? of conspiracy cannot be
appreciate+ in fa>or of petitioners <ho <ere foun+ guilty of simple neglect of +uty, for if
they conspire+ to act negligently, their infraction becomes intentional%6-G7 )here can
har+ly be conspiracy to commit negligence%6-97
Simple neglect of +uty is +efine+ as the failure to gi>e proper attention to a tas?
e0pecte+ from an employee resulting from either carelessness or in+ifference%6-57 In the
present case, petitioners fell short of the reasonable +iligence reFuire+ of them, for
failing to e0ercise +ue care an+ pru+ence in ascertaining the legal reFuirements an+
fiscal soun+ness of the proBects before stamping their imprimatur an+ gi>ing their a+>ice
to their superior%

)he appellate court correctly rule+ that as municipal legal officer, petitioner
Salumbi+es Dfaile+ to uphol+ the la< an+ pro>i+e a soun+ legal assistance an+ support to
the mayor in carrying out the +eli>ery of basic ser>ices an+ pro>isions of a+eFuate
facilities <hen he a+>ise+ 6the mayor7 to procee+ <ith the construction of the subBect
proBects <ithout prior competiti>e bi++ing%E6-:7 As pointe+ out by the Office of the
Solicitor 3eneral, to absol>e Salumbi+es is tantamount to allo<ing <ith impunity the
gi>ing of erroneous or illegal a+>ice, <hen by la< he is precisely tas?e+ to a+>ise the
mayor on Dmatters relate+ to uphol+ing the rule of la<%E6-87 In+ee+, a legal officer <ho
ren+ers a legal opinion on a course of action <ithout any legal basis becomes no
+ifferent from a lay person <ho may appro>e the same because it appears Bustifie+%

As regar+s petitioner 3len+a, the appellate court hel+ that the improper use of
go>ernment fun+s upon the +irection of the mayor an+ prior a+>ice by the municipal
legal officer +i+ not relie>e her of liability for <illingly cooperating rather than
registering her <ritten obBection6H.7 as municipal bu+get officer%

Asi+e from the lac? of competiti>e bi++ing, the appellate court, pointing to the
improper itemiAation of the e0pense, hel+ that the fun+ing for the proBects shoul+ ha>e
been ta?en from the Dcapital outlaysE that refer to the appropriations for the purchase of
goo+s an+ ser>ices, the benefits of <hich e0ten+ beyon+ the fiscal year an+ <hich a++ to
the assets of the local go>ernment unit% It a++e+ that current operating e0pen+itures li?e
OO"=RC refer to appropriations for the purchase of goo+s an+ ser>ices for the
con+uct of normal local go>ernment operations <ithin the fiscal year%6H/7

In &ffice of the &m,udsman v. $ongson,6H,7 the Court remin+e+ the therein
respon+ents, <ho <ere guilty of simple neglect of +uty, that go>ernment fun+s must be
+isburse+ only upon compliance <ith the reFuirements pro>i+e+ by la< an+ pertinent
rules%

Simple neglect of +uty is classifie+ as a less gra>e offense punishable by
suspension <ithout pay for one month an+ one +ay to si0 months% Cin+ing no allege+ or
establishe+ circumstance to <arrant the imposition of the ma0imum penalty of si0
months, the Court fin+s the imposition of suspension <ithout pay for three months
Bustifie+%

Ihen a public officer ta?es an oath of office, he or she bin+s himself or herself to
faithfully perform the +uties of the office an+ use reasonable s?ill an+ +iligence, an+ to
act primarily for the benefit of the public% )hus, in the +ischarge of +uties, a public
officer is to use that pru+ence, caution, an+ attention <hich careful persons use in the
management of their affairs%6H-7

Pu,lic service re-uires integrity and discipline% Cor this reason, public ser>ants
must e0hibit at all times the highest sense of honesty an+ +e+ication to +uty% By the >ery
nature of their +uties an+ responsibilities, public officers an+ employees must faithfully
a+here to hol+ sacre+ an+ ren+er in>iolate the constitutional principle that a public office
is a public trustJ an+ must at all times be accountable to the people, ser>e them <ith
utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty an+ efficiency%6HH7

8!EREORE, the assaile+ 'ecision an+ Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA(
3%R% SP No% 89::8 are AIRMED <ith MODIICATION, in that petitioners,
#icente Salumbi+es, $r% an+ 3len+a Ara4a, are suspen+e+ from office for three 1-2
months <ithout pay%

SO ORDERED.


CONC!ITA CAR)IO MORALES
(ssociate Justice



8E CONCUR*



REYNATO S. )UNO
Chief Justice



ANTONIO T. CAR)IO
(ssociate Justice






RENATO C. CORONA
(ssociate Justice



)RESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR.
(ssociate Justice




TERESITA J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO
(ssociate Justice
ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NAC!URA
(ssociate Justice




ARTURO D. BRION
(ssociate Justice




DIOSDADO M. )ERALTA
(ssociate Justice

LUCAS ). BERSAMIN
(ssociate Justice




MARIANO C. DEL CASTILLO
(ssociate Justice




MARTIN S. VILLARAMA, JR.
(ssociate Justice






ROBERTO A. ABAD
(ssociate Justice




JOSE )ORTUGAL )ERE"
(ssociate Justice





JOSE CATRAL MENDO"A
(ssociate Justice





CERTIICATION


Pursuant to Article #III, Section /- of the Constitution, it is hereby certifie+ that
the conclusions in the abo>e 'ecision <ere reache+ in consultation before the case <as
assigne+ to the <riter of the opinion of the Court%


REYNATO S. )UNO
Chief Justice
6/7 Se>enth 'i>ision then compose+ of $ustice Reme+ios A% SalaAar(Cernan+o, chairperson an+
ponente, an+ $ustices Rosalin+a Asuncion(#icente an+ "nrico A% !anAanas as members%
6,7 )&S <as being subsi+iAe+ by the municipal go>ernment of )ag?a<ayan as it ha+ not yet been
inclu+e+ in the regular bu+get of the 'epartment of "+ucation%
6-7 Rollo, pp% ,H:(,H8%
6H7 Counter Affi+a>it, i+% at ,-:%
6G7 I+% at ,H-%
697 )he criminal aspect of the case +oc?ete+ as Case No% OB(!(C(.,(.H,9(" +eals <ith >iolations of paragraphs 1a2,
1e2, 1g2 an+ 1i2 of Section - of Republic Act No% -./8 1/89.2 or the Anti(3raft an+ Corrupt Practices ActJ paragraph 1c2 of
Sections -99 an+ -98, paragraph 1+2 of Sections G-H, -GG an+ -G9 of Republic Act No% 5/9. 1/88/2 or the !ocal
3o>ernment Co+eJ an+ Article ,,. of the Re>ise+ Penal Co+e%

657 Upon the recommen+ation of 3raft In>estigator an+ Prosecution Officer I 13IPO2 a% )heresa
'% Iu, the Office of the Ombu+sman mo+ifie+ the earlier recommen+ation of 3IPO ary Ayn )%
PunAalan to absol>e 3len+a an+ repriman+ Salumbi+es%
6:7 'ide rollo, p% G-%
687 Negros &riental Planters (ssociation, #nc. .N&P(/ v. Presiding Judge of R$C0Negros
&ccidental, Br. 12, Bacolod City, 3%R% No% /58:5:, 'ecmber ,H, ,..:, G5G SCRA G5G, G:-(G:H%
6/.7 Rollo, p% ,H%
6//7 I+% at ,55%
6/,7 I+% at /GH(/GG%
6/-7 'ide Rules of Court, Rule HG, Sec% H% Petitioners offer the follo<ing assignment of errors:
/% It <as error for the &onorable Court of Appeals to +eny the petitioners the benefit of the case of (rturo B. Pascual v.
Prov. Board of Nueva EciaJ
,% It <as error on the &onorable Court of Appeals <hen it rule+ that the petitioners inclu+ing ayor #icente "%
Salumbi+es III <ere all guilty of conspiracyJ 6an+7
-% It <as error on the part of the &onorable Court of Appeals <hen it affirme+ the ruling of the
&onorable Ombu+sman fin+ing petitioners guilty of simple neglect of +uty6,7 for <hich they 6<ere7
mete+ the penalty of suspension from office of a ma0imum perio+ of si0 192 months% 1italics supplie+2
Rollo, pp% /5-(/5H%
6/H7 'ide rollo, /:H(/:G%
6/G7 Compare supra notes : an+ /H%
6/97 Conducto v. )on"on, A%% No% )$(8:(//H5, $uly ,, /88:, ,8/ SCRA 9/8, 9-H e>en +eclare+ that no ruling to the
contrary ha+ e>en ripple+ this +octrine%
6/57 /.9 Phil% H.9 1/8G82%
6/:7 I+% at H5/%
6/87 I+% at H5,%
6,.7 /,- Phil% 8/9 1/8992%
6,/7 I+% at 8/8%
6,,7 /,8 Phil% GG- 1/8952%
6,-7 I+% at GG9% It <as hel+ that Da crime is a public <rong more atrocious in character than mere
misfeasance or malfeasance committe+ by a public officer in the +ischarge of his +uties, an+ is
inBurious not only to a person or group of persons but to the State as a <hole% )his must be the reason
<hy Article :8 of the Re>ise+ Penal Co+e, <hich enumerates the groun+s for e0tinction of criminal
liability, +oes not inclu+e reelection to office as one of them, at least insofar as a pubic officer is
concerne+% Also, un+er our Constitution, it is only the Presi+ent <ho may grant the par+on of a
criminal offense%E
6,H7 /-: Phil% GH9 1/8982% Asi+e from the lac? of +istinction as to time of commission un+er the
Anti(3raft an+ Corrupt Practices Act, the Court pointe+ out that one of the imposable penalties <as
perpetual +isFualification from public office, <hich e0ten+s beyon+ a particular term of office% It
remar?e+ that an official may amass <ealth through graft an+ corrupt practices an+ thereafter use the
same to purchase reelection an+ thereby laun+er his e>il acts% )he Court further rule+ that the
suspension un+er sai+ statute is not self(operati>e as it nee+s to be or+ere+ by the court in <hich the
criminal case is file+%
6,G7 /G9 Phil% /-5 1/85H2% It <as hel+ that since the criminal prosecution is not abate+ by the fact of
reelection, the pen+ency of a criminal case un+er a >ali+ Information un+er the Anti(3raft an+ Corrupt
Practices Act supplies the legal basis for the suspension from office in the subseFuent term in the e>ent
of reelection% It a++e+, ho<e>er, that the suspension or+er issue+ +uring one term +oes not
automatically apply or e0ten+ to the ne< term to <hich the suspen+e+ official ha+ been reelecte+, in
<hich case the trial court nee+s to issue ane< a supplemental or+er of suspension%
6,97 3%R% No% 8H//G, August ,/, /88,, ,/, SCRA 59:%
6,57 'ide &ffice of the &m,udsman v. Evangelista, 3%R% No% /55,//, arch /-, ,..8, G:/ SCRA
-G., -9/J $rillanes #' v. Pimentel, Sr., 3%R% No% /58:/5, $une ,5, ,..:, GG9 SCRA H5/, H::J Ca,rera
v. )arcelo, 3%R% Nos% /G5H/8(,., 'ecember /-, ,..H, HH9 SCRA ,.5, ,/9(,/5J People v. Judge
$oledano, -:5 Phil% 8G5, 89H 1,...2J People v. Jalosos, -:/ Phil% 98., 5.,(5.- 1,...2%
6,:7 -,9 Phil% :H5 1/8892% Citing soun+ public policy, the Court a++e+ that to rule other<ise <oul+
open the floo+gates to e0acerbating en+less partisan contests bet<een the reelecte+ official an+ his
political enemies, <ho may not stop to houn+ the former +uring his ne< term <ith a+ministrati>e cases
for acts allege+ly committe+ +uring his prior term, such that his secon+ term may thus be +e>ote+ to
+efen+ing himself in those cases to the +etriment of public ser>ice%
6,87 -5, Phil% :8, 1/8882% )he Court state+ that there is the presumption that the people >ote+ for an
official <ith ?no<le+ge of his character, precisely to eliminate the nee+ to +etermine in factual terms
the e0tent of this ?no<le+ge, <hich is an ob>iously impossible un+erta?ing%
6-.7 3%R% No% /9:599, ay ,,, ,..:, GGH SCRA /9.%
6-/7 I+% at /58(/:.%
6-,7 3%R% No% /:898:, Cebruary ,,, ,./.%
6--7 I+%, citing People v. Cayat, 9: Phil% /,, /: 1/8-82% )he test has four reFuisites: 1/2 the
classification rests on substantial +istinctionsJ 1,2 it is germane to the purposes of the la<J 1-2 it is not
limite+ to e0isting con+itions onlyJ an+ 1H2 it applies eFually to all members of the same class%
6-H7 &ffice of the &m,udsman v. !a"aro0Balda"o, 3%R% No% /5.:/G, Cebruary ,, ,..5, G/H SCRA
/H/%
6-G7 Compare <ith gross neglect of +uty 1vide Hao v. (ndres, A%% No% P(.5(,-:H, $une /:, ,..:, GGG SCRA :2% In
Civil Service Commission v. Ra,ang, 13%R% No% /9559-, arch /H, ,..:, GH: SCRA GH., GH52, gross neglect of +uty or
gross negligence refers to Dnegligence characteriAe+ by the <ant of e>en slight care, acting or omitting to act in a situation
<here there is a +uty to act, not ina+>ertently but <illfully an+ intentionally, <ith a conscious in+ifference to conseFuences,
insofar as other persons may be affecte+% It is the omission of that care <hich e>en inattenti>e an+ thoughtless men ne>er
fail to gi>e to their o<n property% In cases in>ol>ing public officials, there is gross negligence <hen a breach of +uty is
flagrant an+ palpable%E In Report on the (lleged Spurious Bail,onds and Release &rders #ssued ,y the R$C, Br. 23, Sta.
Cru", !aguna, A%% No% .H(9(--,(R)C, April G, ,..9, H:9 SCRA G.., G/:, the Court rule+ that D6n7eglect of +uty is the
failure of an employee to gi>e one;s attention to a tas? e0pecte+ of him% 3ross neglect, on the other han+, is such neglect
from the gra>ity of the case, or the freFuency of instances, becomes so serious in its character as to en+anger or threaten the
public <elfare% )he term +oes not necessarily inclu+e <illful neglect or intentional official <rong+oing%E
6-97 'ide 4.S. v. )itlof 6/9G C% Supp% ,+ GG: 1'ist% Court, S%'%N%K% ,../27 obser>es that US fe+eral courts ha>e
+ismisse+ as a logical impossibility the i+ea that one can conspire to act unintentionallyJ Sac5man v. !iggett %roup #nc., 89G
C% Supp% -8/, -8H 1'ist% Court "%'%N%K% /8852 states that there can be no conspiracy to be negligentL that is, to inten+ to act
negligentlyJ Sonnenreich v. Philip )orris #nc. 68,8 C% Supp% H/9, H/8 1S%'% Cla% /88927 recogniAes that a conspiracy to
commit negligence is a non seFuiturJ Rogers v. 6urlo7 6988 C% Supp% 95,, 95G 1N%'% Ill% /8::27 +eclares that a conspiracy to
commit negligence is a para+o0 at best%
6-57 %alero v. Court of (ppeals, 3%R% No% /G//,/, $uly ,/, ,..:, GG8 SCRA //%
6-:7 Rollo, p% 99%
6-87 Republic Act No% 59/., Sec% H:/1b21H2%
6H.7 Republic Act No% 5/9., Sec% -H,% !iability for Acts 'one Upon 'irection of Superior Officer, or Upon Participation
of Other 'epartment &ea+s or Officers of "Fui>alent Ran?% ( Unless he registers his obBection in <riting, the local treasurer,
accountant, bu+get officer, or other accountable officer shall not be relie>e+ of liability for illegal or improper use or
application or +eposit of go>ernment fun+s or property by reason of his ha>ing acte+ upon the +irection of a superior officer,
electi>e or appointi>e, or upon participation of other +epartment hea+s or officers of eFui>alent ran?% )he superior officer
+irecting, or the +epartment hea+ participating in such illegal or improper use or application or +eposit of go>ernment fun+s
or property, shall be Bointly an+ se>erally liable <ith the local treasurer, accountant, bu+get officer, or other accountable
officer for the sum or property so illegally or improperly use+, applie+ or +eposite+% 1un+erscoring supplie+2J cf% 6rias, Sr. v.
People, 3%R% No% /5/H-5, October H, ,..5, G-H SCRA 9GH, as applie+ in criminal cases%
6H/7 Rollo, p% 95, citing Republic Act No% 5/9., Sec% -.9 1+2 M 1f2%
6H,7 3%R% No% /98.,8, August ,,, ,..9, H88 SCRA G95%
6H-7 'ide 6arolan v. Solmac )ar5eting Corporation, 3%R% No% :-G:8, arch /-, /88/, /8G SCRA
/9:, /55(/5:%
6HH7 %alero v. Court of (ppeals, supra at ,H%