ChanRobles Virtual law Library
PHILIPPINE LAWS, STATUTES & CODES
A collection of Philippine laws, statutes and codes not included or cited in the main indices of the Chan Robles Virtual Law Library.
:
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS
PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ PHILIPPINE LAWS, STATUTES & CODES
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 231 -
IMPOSING THE PENALTY OF TWO (2) MONTHS AND TWENTY (20) DAYS SUSPENSION
FROM THE SERVICE ON EDMUNDO LIBID, CHIEF OF MISSION II, FOR SIMPLE
NEGLECT OF DUTY
This refers to the administrative complaint
filed motu proprio by the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) against
Chief of Mission II Edmundo Libid for Inefficiency and Incompetence in
the performance of official duties, Neglect of Duty and Dishonesty.
On July 18-20, 1994, in the course of the regular fiscal,
administrative and consular inspection of Foreign Service Posts, an
Inspection Team headed by Assistant Secretary Estrella Berrenguel of
the DFA conducted an inspection of the Philippines Embassy in
Nairobi.
The Inspections Team found several irregularities at the post, as
follows: the loss of the Embassy vault in October 1993 which was not
reported to the Home Office; collecting fees at the old rates;
non-submission of the latest Performance Appraisal Reports of the
Staff; absence of any diplomatic pouch for the Home Office for the
period of five (5) months; issuance of two checks worth US $42,000 as
advance rental for the Ambassador's residence not in accordance with
fiscal regulations, one check of which was deposited in the personal
account of Mrs. Libid, wife of the respondent; and non-issuance of
receipts for the one (1) year subscription collection for the Embassy
newsletter.
On March 7, 1995, pursuant to the Board of Foreign Service
Administration (BFSA) Resolution No. 95-008., an Investigating
Committee was created to hear the case of CM II Libid. On 26 September
1995, the investigating Committee submitted its report which resulted
in the filing of a formal complaint against respondent.
In support of the charges of Inefficiency and Incompetence in the
performance of official duties, the Department alleged:" Issuance of
passports to Myrna Obsuna Bolay on 22 October 1992, to Regina de Ramos
Libid and Katrina Tatum Libid Papa on 12 April 1994, all without
payment of the required passport fees; Issuance of an Embassy cheque
payable to cash in the amount of US $18,000.00 as part of the US
$42,000.00 payment of annual rental paid for the Ambassador's
residence, without prior Department approval and in violation of
existing administrative and fiscal regulations; Loss of the Embassy
safe and its contents; Excessive telephone and fax charges amounting to
US $4,502.85 incurred during the months of March, April and May 1994;
and Non-payment of the Embassy's account with the Kenya Postal
Telecommunications Corporation amounting to US $32,139.22. On the
charge of Neglect of Duty, the Department further alleged: The
publication of an Embassy newsletter and collection of subscription
fees without prior approval and without issuing proper receipts; and
the employment of one Wilma Tarroza as contractual employee of the
Embassy without prior Department approval. On the charge of Dishonesty,
the Department furthermore alleged; Payment in advance of salaries and
allowances of Embassy personnel for the period 16-31 July and August
1994 contrary to existing regulations; and payment to respondent of
salary, allowances and per diem for the month of September 1994 knowing
that his tour of duty as Philippine Ambassador to Kenya has officially
ended.
Respondent submitted his Answer on February 22, 1995 and his
Supplemental Answer on August 3, 1995 wherein he refuted the charges
against him and explained the reasons for his actions.
The Investigating Committee found the allegations of the Department on
the charge of non-payment of required passport fees substantiated. The
non-payment was established from the Embassy's Fiscal Report, on the
fact that the official receipt numbers were not noted in the passport
application forms and on the Commission on Audit Report dated 26 May
1995. However, respondent's act did not constitute inefficiency and
incompetence in the performance of official duties but only simple
neglect of duty. Respondent should know that existing regulations
require the payments of passport fees before issuance of passports is
made, unless waived by the Secretary of Foreign Affairs under certain
conditions. For failure to give due attention to this requirement in
the performance of his duty, he is liable for neglect of duty. Neglect
of duty, in law, has been interpreted to mean "to fail to give due
attention especially to the performance of a task or duty" (Magallanes
vs. Provincial Board, 66 OG 7832). Secondly, on the charge of issuance
of Embassy check payable to cash without prior Department approval,
respondent should have presented an affidavit of the Assistant
Secretary for Fiscal Management to confirm his alleged prior
authorization. Impliedly, such act would have been proper had the
Department's prior approval been secured. Also, the Department has not
alleged that if suffered damage as a result of the issuance of the
cheque payable to cash, neither has it been established that respondent
unduly profited thereby. The Investigating Committee likewise found
respondent's act as constituting simple neglect of Duty.
Regarding the other charges against respondent concerning the loss of
the Embassy safe, the non-payment of the Embassy's account with the
Kenya Postal Telecommunications Corporation, the publication of an
Embassy newsletter, the hiring of contractual employee without the
prior Department approval and the advance payment of salaries and
allowances of Embassy personnel, the Committee found the evidence
insufficient to sustain the imposition of any administrative penalty.
Respondent's explanation was found acceptable.
However, on the charge of having incurred excessive telephone and fax
bills amounting to US $4,502.85, the Committee did not accept
respondent's explanation for the calls and faxes made to countries
outside of his territorial jurisdiction and to those that were not
connected with the crises which the Embassy experienced. The
examination of the telephone bills by the Ad Hoc Investigating
Committee disclosed that the invoices consisted of 31 pages noted that
655 calls were made to the Philippines; 36 to South Africa; 28 to
Djibouti; 25 to Saudi Arabia; 22 to UA.E; 16 to U.K.; 13 to U.S.A.; 8
to Oman; 7 to Madagascar; 4 to Ethiopia; 4 to France; 4 to Switzerland;
2 to Austria and 1 each to Belgium, Egypt and Luxembourg. The
territorial jurisdiction of the Philippine Embassy in Nairobi covers
Kenya, Burundi, Comoros, Djibouti, Eretria, Ethiopia, Madagascar,
Malawi, Mauritius, Rwanda, Seychelles, Somalia, Tanzania, Uganda and
South Africa before the opening of the Philippine Embassy in Pretoria.
While it could be safely assumed that telephone calls or fax messages
sent to countries within its territorial or consular jurisdiction are
official in nature the same assumption could not be made for calls made
outside of its territorial jurisdiction. Respondent has not explained
nor introduced evidence to establish the official nature of the calls
made to countries outside of the Embassy's jurisdiction and those
to where there were no crises to be attended. Under ordinary
circumstances, the Office of Fiscal Management Services would demand
payment for the unofficial telephone calls. The Investigating
Committee, therefore, recommended that respondent be required to pay
for the telephone calls and fax messages which he could not fully
justify as official in nature.
Lastly, respondent is liable for his failure to adhere to Department
Order 05-95 which mandates that "if an officer has not left the post
ten (10) days from the effectivity of his recall, he shall be paid only
at peso rate and that payment of all allowances shall cease." In the
light of respondent's admission that per Assignment Order 163-94 (12
May 1994) his official tour of duty in Nairobi was "until 31 August
1994 with no further extension", there was therefore no express
extension of his assignment.
The Investigating Committee recommended that the Board direct the
Office of Fiscal Management Services to determine respondent's fiscal
liability for possible refund of the excess amount he received
taking into consideration the quantum meruit principle, given that he
continued to perform his duties until the date of his departure on 28
September 1994.
The findings of the Investigating Committee, as affirmed by the Board
of Foreign Service Administration, was adopted in toto by the
Department of Foreign affairs.
WHEREFORE, upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Foreign Affairs,
this Office hereby orders the SUSPENSION from the service of respondent
EDMUNDO LIBID for two (2) months and twenty (20) days, effective
immediately.
In addition, the Office of Fiscal Management, that Department, is
ordered to determine respondent's liability under Department Order
05-95 and to implement corresponding penalties therefore. Finally,
respondent is ordered to pay for the telephone calls and fax messages
which were not official which were not official in nature.
SO-ORDERED.
chanrobles virtual law library
Back
to Main
Since 19.07.98.