IMPOSING THE PENALTY OF DISMISSAL FROM THE SERVICE ON ASSISTANT CITY PROSECUTOR ZENAIDA C. ISIDRO OF THE OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR OF TACLOBAN CITY, FOR DISHONESTY AND GROSS…

This refers to the
administrative complaint, docketed as DOJ Administrative Case No. 99-0032-FS,
initiated by Ruperto B. Golong, Jr, Chief City Prosecutor (CCP) of Tacloban
City, charging Assistant City Prosecutor (ACP), Zenaida C. Isidro, of the City
Prosecutor’s Office of Tacloban City detailed at the City Prosecutor’s Office
of Calbayog City, for dishonesty. The charge sheet reads as:

“That you had consistently
reported in your Monthly Accomplishment Report for 1996, 1997 and from January
to June 1998 that you had either one (1) or two (2) or no (0) pending case for
resolution and in your Monthly Certificate of Service for the same period; that
you had no pending case for resolution beyond 60-day period. However, when an
inventory of your cases was made x x x it was found out that you had fifty-six
(56) cases unresolved for 1996, sixty-six (66) unresolved cases for 1997 and
twenty-six (26) unresolved cases for 1998 or a total of one hundred forty-four
(144) cases (unresolved) for the said years”

In support of the charges, CCP
Gulong submitted Isidro’s monthly accomplishment report where she made it
appear that she had a 100% total disposition rate of cases for the period
covering 1996-1998, and Isidro’s Certificates of Service for the same period
stating that she had no pending case for preliminary
investigation/reinvestigation/or review that was more than sixty (60) days from
the time a case was assigned to her.

In her defense, Isidro denies
that she was dishonest when she certified in her accomplishment report that she
had no pending cases for the periods 1996, 1997 and from January to June, 1998.
She admits, however, that in 1996 to 1997 she suffered recurrent ailment that
affected her efficiency. She further explains that the bulk of these cases were
for violations of B.P. 22, which basically are collection cases where the
complainant was less interested in prosecuting the respondents; that a number
of these cases did not reach the courts because of complainants’ desistance,
while others did not end in conviction because of settlement. Thus, she
explains, to rush the filing of these cases in court would only clog court
dockets and entail additional expenses on the part of the government. Under the
circumstances, she reasons, it would be more judicious if the rules are relaxed
than to adhere strictly to the time limit imposed by the rules. To substantiate
her allegations, Isidro submitted her medical certificate and leave application
filed on May 29 1997.

Isidro likewise cites other
factors, such as the lack of mimeograph forms of the Information for BP 22,
which she claims contributed to the delay in the resolution of the BP 22 cases.

Lastly, she explains that, as a
matter of usual practice, the Office of the City Prosecutor of Tacloban City
distributes the Certificates of Service to the assistant prosecutors concerned
for their respective signatures one or two days before they transmitted to the
Central Office in Manila; that the forms are already prepared so she just had
to affix her signature therein. She admits that she did not give meticulous
consideration to the certifications written on the form notably the second
certification regarding the pending cases. She insists though that she was not
motivated by dishonesty when she affixed her signature on those forms.

Following a thorough investigation
and a careful evaluation of the complainant’s allegations and the evidence
presented vis-à-vis Isidro’s explanation, the Secretary of Justice found Isidro
guilty of dishonesty and gross neglect of duty, and recommended that she be
dismissed from the service

We concur with the DOJ’s
findings.

Dishonesty is the concealment or
distortion of truth in a matter of fact relevant to one’s office or connected
with the performance of one’s duties. Dishonesty is a serious offense. It
reflects on the person’s character and exposes the moral decay which virtually
destroys one’s honor, virtue and integrity (Prieto vs. Caraga 242 SCRA 315).
Under Section 22 of Rule XIV of the Implementing Rules of the Civil Service,
the offense of dishonesty is punishable by dismissal.

The fact that ACP Isidro
committed acts constituting the offense of dishonesty appears to have been
established. By declaring in her Accomplishment Reports that she had a 100%
total disposition rate of cases for the periods covering 1996 to 1998, and by
certifying in her Certificate of Service that she had no pending cases, when,
in truth and in fact, she had a total of 144 unresolved cases for the said
period, Isidro deliberately concealed the truth on a matter relevant to her
office, i.e. that she failed to comply with the directive under DOJ Circular
No. 49, s. of 1993. This issuance requires all prosecutors to terminate and
resolve preliminary investigation of complaints within sixty (60) days from
date of assignment. Being public documents, the falsification of Accomplishment
Reports and the Certificate Service constitutes a serious offense of dishonesty
as there is a duty to disclose the truth.

Isidro’s protestations of
innocence and good faith deserve scant consideration as they are but attempts to
cover up and justify her negligence as well as her non­compliance with the
prescription of DOJ Circular No. 49.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, and as recommended by the Department of
Justice, Assistant City Prosecutor Zenaida C. Isidro of the Office of the City
Prosecutor of Tacloban City, is hereby dismissed from the service for
dishonesty and gross neglect of duty effective upon receipt of this Order.

DONE in the City of Manila, this 25^th day of November, in the
year of our Lord, two thousand and two.

(Sgd.) GLORIA
MACAPAGAL-ARROYO
President of the Philippines

By the President:

(Sgd.) ALBERTO G. ROMULO
Executive Secretary