A collection of Philippine laws, statutes and codes not included or cited in the main indices of the Chan Robles Virtual Law Library.
Search for
www.chanrobles.com
: ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS
PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ PHILIPPINE LAWS, STATUTES & CODES
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 233
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 233 -
IMPOSING ON DR. VENANCIO G. GARAGAN, PRESIDENT, WEST VISAYAS STATE
UNIVERSITY (WVSU), ILOILO CITY, THE PENALTY OF SIX (6) MONTHS
SUSPENSION FROM THE SERVICE
I. This refers to two (2)
consolidated administrative complaints filed by Messrs. Dan Garganera,
et al. and Manuel J. Posecion, et al. against Dr. Venancio G. Garagan,
President, West Visayas State University (WVSU), Iloilo City, for
alleged dishonesty, mismanagement, harassment of faculty members,
conduct unbecoming a university President, oppression, incompetence,
and insubordination.
II. A. The complaint of Mr. Dan
Garganera, et al.
In a letter-petition, with enclosures, dated September 4, 1989, Mr. Dan
Anthony Garganera, et al., requested that the respondent be
investigated, and thereafter be preventively suspended and removed from
office. The accompanying "Petition" listed thirty-seven (37)
specifications, as follows:
"1.
Illegal cutting and pruning of trees inside the campus without permit
from the DENR; felled trees were unaccounted for; the lumber allegedly
found in his hometown.
"2. Gift
solicitation from the suppliers of the University. (Annex 1 and 2) (sic)
"3.
Falsification of documents, listing himself as the 33rd supplier of the
University in the list of 32 suppliers to be paid. (Annex 3)
"4. Juggling
of funds, in which furnitures for the Office of Extension bought from
JJT Woodcraft was paid from the money of the Office of Research. (Annex
4)
"5.
Mishandling of funds, in which the budget for two casuals in the
Graduate Studies amounted to P1,767,256.54.
"6. Extortion
of 25% in cash or in kind of the produce of the residents in the
WVSU-CAF Lambunao campus and without official receipt.
"7. Receiving
cheques from our suppliers with his name in it instead of the
University.
"8.
Subtraction from the amount collected and cash prize of WVSU's bet in
the Ms. RANCE '89 pageant.
"9. Alleged 10
cases of softdrinks from Coca Cola Bottlers Co. delivered to his
hometown Guimbal and Oton every month.
"10.
Rendition of overtime pay to personnel not requiring it and failure to
submit his clearance and certification of leave credits for his first
salary. (Annex 5)
"11.
Unaccounted amount of P10,000 used by him allegedly for medical books
last February 1988 in which the books have not been delivered until
now. (Annex 6)
"12. An amount
of P71,200 not entered in the Books of Accounts of the University of
Southern Mindanao, alterations in the quotation and absence of receipts
in major equipment purchases. (Annex 7)
"13.
Implicated in the illegal sale of lumber confiscated by DENR.
"14. Delay in
the release of our teacher's summer honoraria, given only by July 11
and without approval of DBM. (Annex 8)
"15. Delay in
the release of NCC 33 salary differentials of 1987 and 1988. (Annex 8)
"16. Hiring of
teachers paid on daily basis, although with their consent, instead of
monthly.
"17. Unfair
promotion of personnel, wherein new ones were promoted ahead of the
older ones; and ineligibles while neglecting those with eligibility and
experience.
"18. Engineers
and architects were appointed as instructors and paid monthly instead
of as contractual. (Annex 9)
"19. A clerk
in his office appointed as an Instructor V.
"20
Salaries of laborers at Lambunao campus since June are unpaid until now.
"21. Slow and
inadequate action on the complaints of students until mass actions were
held. (Annex 10)
"22. Passing a
memorandum altering the Teacher Education Grant without resolution by
the Board of Regents and deliberations by the Academic Council. (Annex
11)
"23. Sudden
transfer of CAF students to Lambunao breaching Task Force Integration
guidelines specifying it to 1991.
"24. Unfair
selection of the Dean for the College of Medicine and violating the
agreement with them last year.
"25. Unfair
selection of the Director of Instruction wherein the guidelines were
altered without the knowledge of the Academic Council.(Annex 12)
"26. Alleged
manipulations in the screening for the Vice-President in Administration
with two complaints pending now. (Annex 13)
"27. Coercion
of a faculty member to execute an affidavit against another. (Annex 14
and 15) (sic)
"28. Harassing
faculty members; raising charges against three of them without
sufficient evidence or clarifying matters first.
"29.
Threats to subordinates and using security guards in work not specified
in their job.
"30.
Disregarding COA memos to enlarge the name of the University in the
presidential car and place an insignia in it.
"31. Utilizing
University services for personal interests such as the HE for his
wife's clothes and a secretary to cook for him and his family.
"32. Reverting
non-masteral degree faculty members to temporary status despite CSC
permanence, eligibility and length of experience. (Annex 16)
"33.
Threatening to close the Laboratory School if the PTA disagree with
having it turned over to a foundation.
"34.
Procrastinating deliberations on the autonomy of the College of
Medicine and meddling in[its]affairs.
"35. His
conduct unbecoming of a President by using belligerent language and
uncouth words and an arrogant attitude.
"36.
Dishonesty and mismanagement.
"37.
Incompetence and inefficiency in solving complaints and discharging his
duties as President."
III. B. The complaint of Dr. Manuel Posecion, et al.
A faculty member of the WVSU, complainant Dr. Manuel Posecion and
others filed an amended complaint dated March 17, 1988 against
respondent for:
1. OPPRESSION
a.
Respondent allegedly converted the University hospital into a lucrative
lending, financing and quasi-banking institution by disallowing the
discharge of patients in the WVSU Hospital without the patients paying
in full their accounts although credits may be granted on a
case-to-case basis subject to appreciable collateral/deposit.
b. Respondent
allegedly issued a series of memoranda threatening the (a) expulsion of
two (2) medical and other junior interns, (b) administrative sanctions
to protesting faculty and students and (c) non-graduation and the
taking of comprehensive examination for medical interns.
2. INCOMPETENCE
a.
While complainants allege that respondent is vested with the discretion
to appoint the Director of the University Hospital, his right is not
absolute, considering the protest thereon of the faculty, staff and
students of the College of Medicine. The complainants suggest that the
respondent should have given due process to the protest.
b. It is
further averred that through the respondent's sheer callousness to the
needs and demands of the faculty, students and staff, the conflict
between them has intensified which could have been averted.
c. On this
charge, it is finally alleged that due to his limited social
perspective, respondent allegedly had the impression that the
University Hospital was established purely for business and profit,
thereby contradicting in the process its primary purpose, which is to
train and produce competent doctors and nurses to serve the
public.
3. DISHONESTY INSUBORDINATION AND INCOMPETENCE
a.
Respondent reportedly failed to appoint any of the three nominees of
the medical faculty to the positions of the Dean of the College of
Medicine and Director of the University Hospital, but instead
designated one Dr. Samuel Fajutrao as Director, an act which was
vehemently opposed by the faculty, staff and students. The
implementation of the compromise arrived at to have a three-man
committee administer the University Hospital was allegedly deliberately
delayed by the respondent to the extent of making it appear that one of
the members of the committee, Dr. Myrna Abello, was in Antique.
b.
The complainants allege that the respondent made it appear that a
certain Rosemarie Piamonte was harassed on her way to the University
Hospital, a claim denied by Piamonte.
c. The
respondent appointed Engineer Jose Mariano Genciana and Architect
Alfredo Gaticales, Jr. as laboratory school instructors without
teaching loads to circumvent the lack of plantilla positions of
Architect and Engineer.
d.
Complainants aver that respondent had assessed and charged students of
the College of Nursing of Related Learning Experience (RLE) fees
without prior approval of the WVSU BOR.
e. Respondent
allegedly did not comply with the agreement for the dropping of all
charges.
f. Respondent,
moreover, defied the directive of the DECS Secretary for him to file
his leave of absence and continued to exercise his functions as WVSU
President by issuing a memorandum dated March 10, 1988, advising the
college cashier not to pay the salaries of the faculty in the College
of Medicine.
g. Sometime in
January, 1988, respondent, in disregard of auditing procedures,
allegedly ordered the release of cash incentives to all employees
without approval of the BOR, subject to refund, should the Department
of Budget and Management not approve the same.
h. Dr. Ernesto
Rivera was allegedly appointed by respondent as Surgery Consultant,
when he is not a member of the University consultative staff, WVSU
Hospital, and which appointment was made without consultation with the
WVSU Hospital Department of Surgery. The complainants also aver that
incompetence was shown by respondent's promise to the resident
physicians of their promotion to professorships, when such promotions
could only be promotions as consultants. Respondent is being charged,
moreover, of not observing the Civil Service rules and regulations in
appointing to sensitive positions unqualified applicants.
4. CONDUCT UNBECOMING A PRESIDENT OF THE WVSU
Respondent allegedly uttered scurrilous and libelous language in formal
gatherings of professionals, students and faculty members.
On September 22, 1989, my Office, after evaluating and studying the
above-administrative charges, found that a prima facie case exists
against respondent. Consequently, he was directed to answer the charges
and was preventively suspended for ninety (90) days pending
investigation of the same. On even date, my office directed the
Secretary of Education, Culture and Sports to investigate the
administrative charges against respondent or for her to create a
committee to undertake the investigation, submitting thereafter to me
her or the committee's findings and recommendation.
Meanwhile, as required, respondent submitted his formal Answers to the
two (2) consolidated complaints of Messrs. Garganera and Posecion, et.
al.
IV. A. Respondent's Answer to the complaint of Mr.
Dan Garganera, et. al.
The Answer of the respondent to this complaint contained the following:
1.
The charge on the cutting and selling of lumber has been investigated
and resolved by the DENR which exonerated respondent.
2. The alleged
solicited gifts were actually donations to the University and not to
him (respondent).
3. Respondent
never included his name as a supplier in the schedule of accounts
payable. His claim which appears therein refers to his honoraria as
Hospital Administrator, which was prepared by the Supply Officer and
the University Accountant.
4. The alleged
juggling of funds stemmed from an error in the designation of the
source of funding.
5. The amount
of P1,767,256.54 was intended for 115, not merely 2, casuals employed
in the university; this amount covered a specific period.
6. The
proceeds of the alleged extortion were turned over to the University
Cashier.
7. The charge
of receiving checks in the respondent's name from University suppliers
was denied; assuming the truth thereof, however, the respondent did not
misappropriate the amounts represented by the checks.
8. On the
allegation that he subtracted from the amount collected and the cash
prize of the WVSU's bet in the Miss Range '89 pageant, the respondent
referred to the records, Annex "5" and "5-a" of the Answer, pointing to
an amount of P1,900.00 necessary to close the amount of P15,592.75 on
the actual receipt of only P13,622.75, and another amount of P2,000.00
deposited with the University Cashier.
9. He never
caused the delivery of softdrinks to his hometown.
10. Respondent
had nothing to do with the claim of one Noel Gaban for overtime pay,
the claim having been given due course by the administrative and
financial units of the University; the submission of his certificates
of transfer, clearance and certificate of leave credits was merely
delayed.
11. Respondent
admits having received the cash advance of P10,000 for the purchase of
xerox copies of medical books for the College of Medicine but upon
discovery that the xerox copies were pirated editions coming from
Taiwan, he aborted the purchase and returned the P10,000.00 he advanced
to the cashier of the University as shown by Official Receipt No.
0810346 dated September 20, 1989.
12. As to the
amount of P71,200.00 allegedly not entered in the books of account of
the University of Southern Mindanao, respondent explained that he was
eventually given a clearance with notation.
13. The
allegation that he instructed the security guard assigned in the
College of Agriculture and Forestry (CAF) to sell confiscated lumber
was denied by respondent thru the affidavits of a certain Pantaleon
Belandres and Yen Suprecencia as well as the Committee Report dated
October 26, 1989.
14. Respondent
had the payment of the faculty processed but the delay was due to
changes in the budgetary procedure in the DBM; the honoraria were,
however, eventually paid.
15. Respondent
contends that the delay in the payment of the NCC Salary differentials
was not due to his acts or omissions but because of a provision in NCC
33 to the effect that payment of differentials should be based on
savings of Personnel Service Function for the fiscal year and since
there were no savings at the time, payment was not made.
16. The hiring
of additional teachers was due to increase in enrollment in the College
of Arts and Sciences and since there were no plantilla items given, the
DBM allowed the employment of instructors on a daily basis as shown in
Annex "12" of his Answer.
17. Respondent
denied having anything to do with the promotions of faculty members,
the same being incumbent on the NCC 33 Evaluation Committee and the
Committee on Review. Respondent's participation therein was merely in
the authentication of the promotions. As to the non-teaching personnel,
the procedures of the Civil Service were followed.
18. Respondent
justified the hiring of an Architect and Engineer as there were
available instructor positions.
19. The
Instructor V alluded to as performing clerical work in respondent's
office was denied. The Clerk, Ms. Lea Lebrilla, was a member of the
academic staff.
20. Respondent
denied, likewise, that he was the cause of the delay in the payment of
salaries of the laborers in the Lambunao campus. The responsibility
should be borne by the Dean of the College of Agriculture and Forestry
for not checking the requirements for the release of such salaries.
21. On the
matter of the Teacher Education Grant (TEG), the alterations consisting
in the reduction of the grade point average for the maintenance of the
scholarship as well as the increase in stipends were approved by the
WVSU Board of Regents (BOR); approved by the WVSU BOR likewise were the
subsequent decrease of the stipends for the second, third or fourth
year TEG's and the phasing-out thereof by December 31, 1989.
22. The WVSU
BOR approved the integration of the College of Agriculture in the main
campus to the Lambunao campus as it was difficult and expensive to
maintain two campuses,
23. Respondent
asserts that the designation of the Dean of the College of Medicine was
based on the recommendation of the Ad Hoc Committee which then
forwarded its recommendation to the DECS Secretary, who in turn caused
the same to be effected by the WVSU BOR. He denies having violated any
agreement with the protesting faculty of the College of Medicine.
24. Respondent
added that he recommended for designation as Director of Instruction
one whom he believed possesses all the qualifications and potentials
therefore but that his nomination was not given due course. Instead the
WVSU BOR created a committee to provide qualification standards for the
nomination of Director of Instruction.
25. The
appointment of Avelino Paderna as Vice President for Administration was
made pursuant to the recommendation of the Selection Board which based
the same on the criteria provided by the Civil Service Commission.
26. Respondent
denied having coerced anybody to execute an affidavit against anyone.
Respondent advances that the reason the affiant, Dr. Andresito
Millamena, turned against him was respondent's act in asking the
affiant to explain his (affiant's) alleged involvement in the barter of
carabaos.
27. The charge
of harassment was denied, respondent maintaining that the charge was
filed against three faculty members only after their explanations
proved to be unsatisfactory.
28. Respondent
avers compliance with the alleged violation regarding markings on the
official car of the WVSU President.
29. Respondent
denies utilizing University services for personal needs, attaching
affidavits contradicting allegations that University personnel sewed
the dresses of respondent's wife and cooked for the respondent and his
wife.
30. As to the
charge of threatening to close the laboratory school, respondent
maintains that if the school referred to was in SEAFDEC, such had been
turned over to a foundation.
31. Anent the
alleged encroachment of respondent in the autonomous governance of the
College of Medicine, respondent contends that the directive issued by
the DECS Secretary was couched in general terms which required the
issuance of guidelines by the BOR which have not as yet been finalized
and that the demands of the faculty were beyond his power and
authority. Respondent likewise entered a general denial as to the other
charges.
B. Respondent's Answer to the complaint of Dr. Manuel
Posecion et. al.
His answer contained these averments:
1. On Oppression
a.
Respondent denies this allegation as having no basis because he has
never harassed and/or oppressed complainants in any manner. The acts
alluded to as constituting oppression are acts within his prerogative
and authority as WVSU President.
b. The
memorandum issued by respondent with respect to patients in the
hospital was intended to protect the finances of the University.
Respondent contends that at the end of 1987, the University Hospital
had receivables of more than P3 million while its accounts payable were
more than P2.6 million.
c. Respondent
adds that it is his prerogative as head of the University to cause the
investigation of students for misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the
best interest of the hospital. The memorandum issued by him was not a
threat but a proper exercise of the prerogative to inculcate discipline
and proper decorum in the premises.
All the memoranda are clear
manifestations of respondent's desire to protect the school against the
unwarranted and illegal acts of complainants. Respondent concludes that
the purpose of the charges is to harass and embarrass his
administration and ultimately relieve him as University President.
2. On Incompetence
a.
The matter of the designation of an OIC in the College of Medicine of
the University Hospital goes with his position as President; that he
cannot allow others to dictate to him how to exercise said authority,
otherwise he would be violating the trust vested in him by his
appointment as WVSU President and that such authority is not subject to
review or approval by the faculty.
b. The
intention of respondent's memorandum (Annex "D") as viewed from its
contents is the survival of the University Hospital which, according to
respondent, is in a quagmire of debts and that unless remedial measures
are taken, the same may be lost to the prejudice of the University, the
medical students and the public served by it.
3. On Dishonesty and Insubordination
a.
Respondent's request for nominees to the position of Director of the
University Hospital was actually a form of consultation with the
faculty; that the faculty's recommendation does not bind him; that Dr.
Fajutrao is more qualified as OIC of the University Hospital and
complainants' nominee, Dr. Manila, was already holding the position of
Dean of the College of Medicine and to give him more work would be to
lessen his effectiveness as Dean.
b. Respondent
denies the delay in the implementation of the creation of the three-man
committee, attributing it to the difficulty in securing clearance to
allow Dr. Rivera to serve in the committee.
c. As to the
affidavit of Piamonte, respondent dismisses it as "[o]f no moment for
it does not have any bearing in the question involved."
d. Respondent
justifies his appointments of Architect Gaticales and Engineer Genciana
as in line with the scheme to provide an in-house capability for
planning, designing and supervising construction of infrastructure in
the University without having to depend on the Department of Public
Works and Highways in order to prevent delay. According to respondent,
this is practiced by state colleges and universities where architects
and engineers are hired but given token teaching loads, save if the
volume of work is great where no teaching load is assigned.
e. The alleged
assessment of Regional Learning Centers (RLC) fees is in accordance
with and authorized by the DECS, respondent alleges.
f. Respondent
avers the absence of mutual reciprocation in the withdrawal of cases
filed by the parties as the reason why he did not withdraw his cases
filed against some complainants.
g. The
directive of the DECS Secretary that he go on leave of absence was,
according to respondent, changed on March 3, 1988. Instead of going on
leave, respondent, with the consent of the WVSU BOR, may continue
exercising his functions and duties in Manila until April 3, 1988; that
upon his return, the arrangement was for Mr. Nieves, the designated
University OIC, to be immediately relieved in accordance with
administrative procedure.
h. WVSU merely
followed the practice of the release of medical incentives; when this
was declared void, the practice was discontinued and the amounts
received ordered reimbursed/refunded.
i. The
designation of Dr. Ernesto Rivera to the consultative staff was a
consequence of the designation of Dr. Abello to the position of OIC
Director of the University Hospital. However, when Dr. Abello declined
his designation respondent designated instead Dr. Rivera who had all
the qualifications for the position of Director of the Hospital. This
was later on confirmed by the BOR which granted him honoraria for his
services until he was relieved in October, 1988.
On
the matter of the appointment of Mr. Pantaleon Belandress it is stated
that this was as a result of the Selection Board's screening. Although
Belandres was number two, he was appointed, as the appointment was
within the respondent's prerogative.
j. With
respect to the charge of conduct unbecoming a University President,
respondent specifically denies the same as gratuitous opinions without
evidence to substantiate the charge.
The records also show that aside from the above complaints, a
letter-petition dated September 8, 1989, with annexes, was filed by Dr.
Jesus L. Nieves, et al., against herein respondent praying for the
respondent's investigation, preventive suspension, and dismissal. The
charges against the respondent in this complaint are grouped under four
main headings: dishonesty and other graft and corrupt practices,
mismanagement, harassment of faculty, and conduct unbecoming a
University President.
In a letter to Atty. Nellie N. Tansioco, Legal Division, DECS, dated
January 30, 1990, Atty. Norberto J. Posecion, who acted as notary in
the September 8, 1989, letter-petition, stated:
"May
I also bring to your attention that another complaint dated September
8, 1989 was filed by Mrs. Nola Hibionada, Jesus Nieves and many others
also against VENANCIO GARAGAN . . .
Incidentally, a reading of the
complaint/petition in the Garganera, et al. vs Garagan case would
readily show that the charges thereon are also alleged in the
Hibionada, Nieves, et al. vs Venancio Garagan case. . . "
Pursuant to the memorandum of my Office dated September 22, 1989, the
DECS Secretary created a committee to investigate the charges against
respondent. After hearing the DECS Investigating Committee (Committee
for brevity) submitted its Consolidated Investigation Report dated
March 10, 1991 to the DECS Secretary.
Based on the report, out of the consolidated thirty-nine (39) charges
against respondent, twelve (12) were voluntarily withdrawn by the
complainants thru their counsel. Consequently, twenty seven (27)
charges were heard by the Committee and after a careful study of the
facts and circumstances of the case, including the evaluation of both
documentary and testimonial evidence presented, the Committee found
respondent guilty of the charges of(1) abuse of authority in (a) the
solicitation of gifts from suppliers for the College of Medicine; (b)
the turning over of the Commission for Miss Range '89 to the
association of non-teaching personnel and (c) misrepresentation in the
Memorandum he issued by making it appear that there was a WVSU BOR
resolution reversing the rules pertaining to Teacher Education
Grantees, when in fact there was no such resolution; and (2) conduct
unbecoming a University President for using uncouth words and insulting
language and for not honoring his commitments. In this Report,
falsification of documents appears twice — as count 3 and as count 18.
However, the Committee absolved respondent of the other charges
contending that the same were not proven or justified under the
circumstances, or fell under the administrative disciplinary authority
or prerogative of the respondent. The Committee recommended the penalty
of suspension for one (1) year.
Subsequently, upon referral to the DECS Secretary, the latter adopted
and agreed with the findings of the Committee and recommended that
respondent be suspended for one (1) year but added that, inasmuch as
the respondent has reached the retirable age of 63, he be directed to
retire from the service to promote peace and order within the
University community.
After a careful study and review of the records of this case, including
the documentary evidence presented by the parties, I fully concur with
the findings of the DECS Secretary and am convinced that indeed
respondent is guilty of the charges he was found to have committed.
Examining the records, respondent failed to overcome the charge that he
made gift solicitations from suppliers to equip the University
Medical/Dental Clinic and the University Central Laboratory. While the
intentions of respondent may be noble and laudable, that is for the
improvement and well-being of the facilities of the University, the
means resorted to were undeserving of a public official like
respondent. The fact that respondent, in his letter of January 9, 1989,
informed the various suppliers that he was able to secure funding for
the payment of their unbooked accounts, and in exchange or reward
therefore, he requested that said suppliers donate something in kind or
in cash to the clinic and laboratory of the university, is
unsurmountable proof that, indeed, respondent is guilty of misconduct.
His letter of January 9, 1989, the contents of which respondent does
not deny, speaks for itself herein.
I also observed that respondent had misled the WVSU College of
Education, specifically the Teachers Education Grantees (TEG), into
believing that a WVSU BOR resolution was issued as of June 6, 1989,
revising the rules pertaining to the grantees. In his memorandum to the
Dean of the College of Education dated June 6, 1989, respondent took it
upon himself to assume that a BOR resolution was then in effect and
existing when the truth of the matter was that there was no such
resolution. The resultant effect was that the grantees failed to
receive their monthly stipend of P400.00 for the semester of school
year 1989-90 allegedly for lack of funds.
Upon close scrutiny of the records, it is also clear that respondent
allowed WVSU school funds to be used for its candidate in the
canvassing of the Miss Range '89 pageant, with the understanding that
the same be refunded. After deducting the said amount which was
deposited with the Cashier of the University, respondent directed that
the amount be turned over to the University Employees Association for
proper disposition without giving a share to the WVSU bet. This, again,
I consider as a clear case of abuse of authority amounting to
misconduct on the part of respondent. I agree with the Committee's
findings that, although respondent did not benefit from the proceeds
his act of not giving a share to the Miss Range '89 candidate of WVSU
amounted to abuse of his authority.
The finding of the Committee for conduct unbecoming a university
president by using uncouth words and insulting language and for not
honoring his commitments is equally justified. Respondent, being a head
of an institution of learning, like the WVSU, should have exercised
more prudence and restraint in his dealings with his constituents in
the university. Uncalled for utterances which ultimately will reflect
on his personality and leadership should have been avoided by
respondent in the first place.
I have not closed my eyes, however, to respondent's more than
thirty-three (33) years in the government service; the fact that this
is his first offense; and that he has no derogatory or criminal record.
His actuations, to be sure, have not entirely blemished his integrity
as President of the University. Nevertheless, let it be understood that
when an officer or employee is disciplined, the object is not so much
as to punish him; rather, it is to improve public service and preserve
the people's faith and confidence in their government.
Culpable as he is of misconduct and conduct unbecoming a University
President, he has to face the consequences of his acts. However, with
the aforementioned mitigating factors which I appreciate in his favor,
a greater degree of leniency is in order. Upon these premises, I
consider the penalty of six (6) months suspension from office as
appropriate.
WHEREFORE, Dr. VENACIO G. GARAGAN, President of the West Visayas State
University (WVSU), Iloilo City, is hereby found GUILTY of misconduct
and conduct unbecoming a university President as charged and is hereby
meted the penalty of six (6) months SUSPENSION from office, effective
upon receipt of a copy hereof.
SO ORDERED.
Manila, Philippines, September 2, 1991.
chanrobles virtual law library
Back
to Main
Since 19.07.98.