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.
Search for
www.chanrobles.com:
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS
PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ PHILIPPINE LAWS, STATUTES & CODES
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 264 -
DISMISSING DIRECTOR NARCISSA V. MUÑASQUE FROM THE SERVICE AS
DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL LIBRARY.
This is an administrative complaint filed
by Redempta Francia, et al., against Narcissa V. Muñasque,
Director of The National Library (TNL), charging her of various acts of
irregularities.
In a letter-complaint of June 5, 1990, the herein complainants, who are
employees of TNL charged Muñasque of the following:
I.
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
Anomalies raised by complainants relative to these contracts are: (1)
lack of authority on the part of respondent to sign contracts exceeding
P50,000.00; (2) no urgency to justify undertaking the projects thru
negotiated contracts; (3) TOR Construction, with whom respondent
entered into a contract for the supply and installation of 2 units free
standing panel board (Exh. "O"), was not bona fide contractor when the
contract was entered into on November 19, 1986, for it was only
registered with the Department of Trade and Industry on March 2, 1990.
In answer, respondent alleged that (1) repair of the leaking roofdeck
is urgent and cannot be delayed for another 2 or 3 years, since the
leak had already caused damage to the ceiling, woodworks, carpets,
precious collections and other properties and nearly caused fire at TNL
when it short-circuited the electrical wirings; (2) a canvass was
conducted and three (3) contractors submitted their bids, which was won
by Delos Santos Construction with its lowest bid; (3) projects for the
other negotiated contracts were obviously emergencies; and (4) these
contracts, before becoming effective, were submitted to the DECS
Secretary for approval and subjected to the normal accounting and
auditing rules.
II.
Complainants allege that respondent has been using the vehicle since
its registration in May 1990. It is driven by her personal and private
driver. It is not parked during the night in the TNL garage but in her
house. It was only on February 15, 1991 that it was marked "For
Official Use Only".
Respondent claims that the vehicle had since bore the government red
plate and the "TNL-NCLIS for Official Use Only" mark; that the car is
also being used by other TNL officials in official business
transactions; and that she had never claimed travel or gasoline
allowance.
III.
Complainants claim that the binders' transfer to the engine room by
respondent was arbitrary and oppressive, and carried on despite the
binders' protest. The engine room is without any window, and noise
inside is constant due to the central water pump housed therein. In
addition, the room is also the storage area for condemned
equipment.
Contrary to the above claim, respondent avers that, on August 14, 1989,
six of the nine binders were deployed to the different service areas
and the rest assigned to an area outside the engine room while awaiting
for their final reassignment.
IV.
Complainants allege that Redempta Francia, Assistant Chief, Government
Publications Division (GPD), has been with the unit for the past 17
years. Upon the retirement of the Chief, Marcela F. Abadilla, on
December 15, 1989, Francia took over the duties of Chief and was
recommended to the position by Abadilla. However, respondent
recommended an outsider, Lilia Abad, to the position. This was
disapproved by the DECS Secretary and so respondent recommended another
outsider, Corazon Nera. When this was also disapproved, she designated
one of her favorites, Prudenciana Cruz, Chief of the Reference
Division, as Officer-in-Charge of the GPD. Francia and her staff
protested, and she was later designated Acting Chief by the DECS
Secretary.
For her defense, respondent alleges that she had prior clearance from
the DECS Secretary to hire employees from outside; that all the
applicants were screened, including Francia and Tominez, who refused to
take the aptitude test; and that Francia lacked the qualifications and
proper work attitude. As to the non-payment to Francia of RATA,
respondent alleged that Francia's appointment as Acting Chief, per the
Secretary's Order, was made effective July 18, 1990; hence application
for RATA prior to that date was disapproved.
V.
Another instance of favoritism was when Prudenciana Cruz went on study
leave to Northern Illinois University in August 1989. Since she cannot
finish her M.A. in that school because her masteral units from U.P.
were not credited, she stayed and worked there while studying a
computer course at the same time. She continued to receive her salary
from TNL and charged her one-way fare ticket to the U.S. against the
TNL funds. This is highly irregular.
Per complainant's allegations, Cruz has no scholarship grant, hence
respondent violated Republic Act (R.A.) 3019 when she knowingly
approved the grant of her basic salary during her study leave and the
reimbursement of her one-way ticket to the U.S. by means of a spurious
scholarship grant contract.
Respondent denies the charge of favoritism, observing that even
complainants were also sent abroad on several occasions. She added that
the travel of Mrs. Cruz was approved by then DECS Secretary Quisumbing
upon request of respondent; that the scholarship contract was executed
to have a tie-up between the grantor and the grantee; and that the
reimbursement of the plane fare to Northern Illinois University was
approved by the DECS Secretary.
VI.
According to complainants, Mrs. Bolos is a Career Executive Service
eligible. When she was detailed to the Malacañang Palace Library
to inventory and classify library materials, the Presidential Staff
Director even noted that she is CESO III, a position that may be a bit
too high for the library. To get rid of Mrs. Bolos, respondent (1)
recommended her detail on full-time basis, together with Miss Gilda
Antiquera, Supervising Librarian I, effective December 5, 1986; (2)
requested that separate items be provided or created for Bolos and
Antiquera by the Presidential Library, which was however rejected by
the Presidential Personnel Officer; (3) favorably endorsed the
extension of the detail of Mrs. Bolos to Malacañang, the
phaseout of her position and eventual separation from TNL; (4)
reprimanded and stripped Mrs. Bolos of her functions, per respondent's
memorandum of April 22, 1991, after Mrs. Bolos was recalled by DECS
Secretary Cariño on April 30, 1990; (5) denied Mrs. Bolos of the
use of her old office and, instead, assigned her to the Legal Deposit
Office; and (6) designated her OIC for the Library for the Blind, which
to date has not been operational, all of which constitute harassment,
oppression and unwarranted abuse of discretion.
Respondent avers that, upon her assumption of Directorship in October
1986 she gave Mrs. Bolos the chance to prove herself, but she did not
come up to expectations. Further give her a chance, she was detailed to
Malacañang. She was not stripped of her functions but given
special functions and appointed OIC, Library for the Blind.
VII.
Complainants claim that respondent's act of entering into a contract
with PMP Motion Pictures Production, Inc., for the exclusive use of the
TNL premises for three (3) days and the suspension of work during the
same period constitute conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the
service. The time cards of the employees were noted O.B. and no
deductions were made from the salaries of the employees.
Respondent denied receipt of kickbacks, but admitted that PMP
Production outfit donated to TNL two (2) computers, which were entered
in its books. TNL was opened to the public during the filming and work
was not suspended.
VIII.
Complainants allege that the contract for services entered into by
respondent is manifestly disadvantageous to the government.
For her part, respondent claims that the abolition of security guard
positions was recommended during the DECS reorganization. Four (4) of
the eight (8) security guards were absorbed by TNL, two (2) were taken
in by the National Historical Institute (NHI) and two (2) opted to
avail of the benefits of reorganization.
IX.
Respondent claims that Mrs. Hammerstein offered free consultancy to TNL
and, on March 26-27, 1987, she was sent by TNL to attend a conference
at Camp Aguinaldo, and this is where the P250.00 went.
After a comprehensive evaluation of the respective evidence presented
by the parties, DECS Secretary Isidro D. Cariño gave the
following recommendation:
"On the basis of the foregoing findings of irregularities which
attended the execution of the various negotiated contracts entered into
by the respondent, her perpetuation of acts of oppression and
harassment against her subordinates, particularly, Asst. Director
Bolos, and her disregard of the basic provisions or requirements of
laws, we respectfully recommend to her Excellency the suspension of
Director Narcissa Muñasque for a period of one (1)
year."
At the outset, it must be stressed that the finding of DECS Secretary
Cariño is only recommendatory in nature (Cuyegkeng vs. Cruz, 108
Phil. 1147), since the President has administrative disciplinary
authority over respondent who is a presidential appointee.
This brings to the fore the core issue of whether or not respondent is
.administratively liable for irregularities, which attended the
execution of the various negotiated contracts that she entered into,
acts of oppression and harassment against her subordinates, and
disregard of the basic provisions or requirements of laws.
After going over the records of the case, I concur with the DECS
findings.
According to DECS Secretary Isidro D. Cariño, the delegated
authority of Heads of Agencies to approve negotiated contracts for
services or for furnishing of supplies is limited only to a contract
price of not more than P100,000.00.
Clearly, respondent exceeded her authority by approving the following
contracts: (1) with Delos Santos Construction for the Waterproofing of
the TNL roofdeck in the amount of P1,020,250.00; (2) with TOR
Construction for the supply and installation of 2 units Free Standing
Panel Board, 3 phase 220 volts for feeder 1 and 2 Power Distribution
line in the amount of P540,981.46; and (3) with Emyl Electrical
Industrial Service for Permanent Installation of main feeder line for
P378,483.56.
At this point, it is difficult to imagine a person of respondent's
stature and occupying the highest position in the agency to be unaware
on the limitations of the powers she is supposed to exercise.
Apropos, thereto, it is also elementary that contracts should only be
entered into with bona fide contractors. Respondent did the contrary
when, in 1986, she entered into a contract with TOR Construction, which
was not yet registered with the Department of Trade and Industry.
While it may be true that the TNL roofdeck really needed to be
repaired, respondent should have attended to it earlier in order to
comply with the bidding procedure prescribed by Presidential Decree
1594. It was correctly found by Secretary Cariño that:
". . . Since the leaking which affected only the ceilings of some areas
of TNL had been going on for years, a delay of a few weeks in order to
comply with the requirements of a public bidding would not have
mattered. There was no evidence shown to prove the alleged distruction
of valuable collections, etc. on account of the leaking rooftops. Time
constraints did not obtain and the situation was not an exceptional
case where time was of the essence as to justify the undertaking of a
project by negotiated contract as required under Sec. 4 of P.D. No.
1594". Similarly the Commission on Audit (COA), in its report found
that:
"a)
"b)
and recommended that the contractor be required to refund excess
payment; that all future construction projects be made through public
bidding; and that appropriate charges be filed against officials
included in the irregular practices.
Respondent contends that the COA report is not competent evidence of
irregularities at TNL, not having been tested by cross-examination.
Considering that the proceedings are administrative in nature, the COA
report could have been controverted by contrary evidence, which was not
done by respondent.
As to the Isuzu Trooper, contrary to respondent's allegation that the
"For Official Use Only" marking could have been done much earlier than
February 15, 1991, it had been proven that the blue paint used in the
marking was bought on February 13, 1991, as evidenced by the
Requisition and Issue Voucher, dated February 13, 1991, signed by Mr.
Enriquez, respondent's secretary; hence the marking must have been done
after that date, not earlier as respondent suggests. The use therefore
of the Isuzu Trooper by respondent from May 1990 up to February 12,
1991 without the required marking was a violation of COA Circular No.
75-6, dated November 7, 1975.
As found by the investigating panel and admitted by respondent, it was
sufficiently established that during the period from December 1989 to
June 1990, the employees of the Bindery Section had to do the cutting
of cardboards, rounding and cutting of books near the Engine Room where
the cutting and rounding machines were placed upon orders of the
respondent. The fact that the place is hot due to poor ventilation, is
noisy and is not a suitable workplace has not been disputed. I thus
join Secretary Cariño in his conclusion that respondent's
transfer of the employees of Bindery Section to such a place from
December 1989 to June 1990 is "oppressive and shows her insensitivity
to the plight of her employees."
Relative to the detail of Assistant Director Bolos, I agree with the
DECS Secretary that "such acts of the respondent deprived TNL of the
services of a highly qualified Assistant Director, a career official
with sufficient experience in the operations of TNL a fact which does
not speak well of her conduct as head of an agency."
It is a common practice among heads of offices or agencies to give
so-called "special assignments" to officials whom they do not favor. It
is one way of getting rid of them, especially when the assignment is
outside of their own offices like the Malacañang assignment of
Mrs. Adoracion Bolos. This is very apparent from respondent's
recommendation that she be given an item at the Presidential Library,
which was rejected by the Presidential Personnel Officer.
With respect to the claim of favoritism in the attendance of
seminars/conferences abroad, it was admitted by complainants that Ms.
Francia and others were also sent abroad, but to nearby Asian countries
only. While it is conceded that respondent has the discretion of choice
of officials who should be sent abroad, in this instance she did abuse
her discretion.
On the issue of the controversial study leave of Ms. Prudenciana Cruz,
respondent avers that "there was no evidence that Ms. Cruz was on study
leave." However, the second paragraph of respondent's letter to DECS
Secretary Lourdes Quisumbing, dated July 17, 1989, states:
"In this connection, may I request your kind office to grant an
authority for Mrs. Cruz to avail of the opportunity to pursue higher
studies and to provide her salary while she will be on study leave."
(Emphasis supplied)
Thus, the explanation by Secretary Cariño reads:
". . . Exec. Order 129 dated May 6, 1968 (Official Travel abroad of
government employees on scholarship grants, fellowship) did not apply
to her the same requiring a grantee to be on full study status to
enable her to take full advantage of the opportunity to acquire
knowledge and/or skill for the benefit of the improved public service
and not accept any other assignment (Sec. 13). The indorsement of
her travel and the request for payment of her salaries and plane fare
by the respondent which were approved by Secretary Quisumbing are
irregular. The execution of a pro-forma 'Contract of Scholarship'
between Ms. Cruz and the respondent has no legal basis since Mrs. Cruz
was actually and admittedly on study leave (Exh. '106,' letter of Dir.
Muñasque to Secretary Quisumbing.) The clear purpose of
respondent was to accommodate Ms. Cruz, in effect, granting her
unwarranted benefits by paying her salaries during the period of her
study leave from August 1989 to June 1990 to the undue prejudice of the
government." (Emphasis supplied.)
The claim of alleged kickbacks in allowing the use of TNL premises for
the filming of "Braddock: Missing in Action III" was not proven.
Neither was complainant's allegation that respondent ordered
the-suspension of work during the filming established. However, as
found by Secretary Cariño, "it cannot be denied that the
shooting disrupted the normal operations of TNL, of which respondent
was fully aware, work having been considerably suspended as shown by
the 'OB' markings on the employees time cards"; and for this respondent
is responsible.
I disagree with the DECS Secretary that respondent deserves only the
penalty of suspension for one (1) year. By disregarding prescribed
requirements in contract award and approval, respondent betrays her
propensity to take illegal shortcuts that compromise the government's
financial interest. As shown in the COA report, supra, the government
lost some P60,000.00 in contracts entered into by respondent without
public bidding.
Presently, the atmosphere of mutual respect very much needed for a
healthy working relationship between the parties has been compromised.
Thus, the National Library should be given a fresh start, not only for
a year, but also for the years ahead to achieve the growth and
expansion which public service demands.
WHEREFORE, respondent Narcissa V. Muñasque is hereby found
guilty of irregularities, which attended the execution of the various
contracts that she entered into, of acts of oppression and harassment
against her subordinates, and of disregarding the basic provisions or
requirements of laws to the undue prejudice of the government and the
service. Accordingly, she is hereby meted the penalty of DISMISSAL from
the service, effective upon her receipt hereof.
ADMINISTRATIVE CASE AGAINST NARCISSA V. MUÑASQUE, DIRECTOR OF
THE NATIONAL LIBRARY, FOR VARIOUS ACTS OF IRREGULARITIES ETC.
DONE in the City of Manila,
this 30th day of January, in the year of Our Lord, nineteen hundred and
ninety-two.
chanrobles virtual law library
Back
to Main
Since 19.07.98.
