REPRIMANDING RESPONDENT ROGER P. PEREZ, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COMMISSION ON HIGHER EDUCATION (CHED)

This is an administrative case against Dr. Roger P. Perez, formerly
Officer-in-Charge of the National Capital Region (NCR) of the Commission
on Higher Education (CHED) and currently Executive Director of the said
Commission, for (1) selling in 1999 thesis and dissertation books
stored at the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), NCR, to the La
Salette College in Isabela; and (2) serving as professor on weekends in
the Graduate School of the University of La Salette, Isabela City. The
charges were investigated by the Presidential Commission Against Graft
and Corruption (PCAGC).

The action of the Commission on the complaint as well as its findings
and recommendation thereon embodied in its Resolution dated March 14,
2000, are hereunder quoted, to wit:

“The charge against respondent Roger P. Perez, who was then the
Officer-in-Charge of CHED-NCR, and presently the Executive Director of
the Commission on Higher Education, consist of two (2) specifications:
(1) that as the then OIC of CHED-NCR, respondent sold or caused the sale
to the University of La Salette of Santiago City of the thesis and
dissertation books submitted by private schools to the CHED-NCR, in
order to raise funds with which to procure computer units and a
television set for use of the office; and (2) that respondent served as a
professor on weekends in the Graduate School of the said University.

“For his defense as contained in his verified Answer dated
September 22, 1999 and in his Position Paper dated October 26, 1999
(Records, pp. 45-57), in relation to the first specification above,
respondent Perez denies having sold to the University of La Salette the
thesis and dissertation books on file in the storeroom of CHED-NCR,
although he admits having allowed the said University to take possession
of the said materials for free or without any monetary consideration
whatsoever.

“Further, respondent avers that the computer units adverted to in
the complaint have been actually donated to the CHED-NCR by the
University of La Salette while the television set was purchased from
available office funds; that he acted well within his authority as the
then head of CHED-NCR, since the subject thesis and dissertation books
are not considered “records” within the purview of Department Order No.
13-A dated February 3, 1988, so that the disposition of said materials
was at his discretion as the then agency head concerned; that even
before he took over as OIC of CHED-NCR, the previous head of said office
had allowed other institutions of higher learning to secure copies of
the thesis and dissertation books from its storeroom; that he did not
act maliciously nor negligently when he allowed the University of La
Salette to take possession of the questioned materials since before he
took action, he sought the advice of the Records Officer of CHED-NCR and
was informed that there were no formalities in the disposal of said
records inasmuch as they are not technically government property; and
that he has not in any way benefited personally from the fact that he
allowed the University of La Salette to take the questioned books for
use in its library.

“Respondent attached to his Answer a copy each of the Memorandum of
Agreement dated January 19, 1999 and Deed of Donation dated January 23,
1999, both of which he signed with Rev. Romeo B. Gonzales, MS, of the
University of La Salette (Records, pp. 36-40).

“Anent the second specification of having served as ‘professor on
weekends,’ respondent denies having been a regular professor at the
University of La Salette, although he admits having conducted lectures
on specific topics every now and then in the Graduate School of said
University for which he received a token honorarium in the amount of
P500.00 for every lecture that he conducted. Corollarily, respondent
points out that even admitting for the sake of argument that he was a
part-time professor at the University of La Salette, he was at the time
armed with an authority to teach signed by then CHED Chairman Angel C.
Alcala (Records, p. 63).

“The issue to be resolved in the instant case are as follows:

“1.     Re: Disposition of thesis and dissertation books —

(a)     Whether or not respondent Perez as the then OIC of
CHED-NCR was authorized to dispose of the questioned thesis and
dissertation books, University of La Salette to take possession of the
same;

(b)     Whether or not the computer hardwares donated to CHED-NCR
by the University of La Salette, in token of its appreciation for the
bestowal of the questioned thesis and dissertation books to it, have
been properly booked-up as required under government rules and
regulations; and

(c)     Whether or not there are graduate students who may have
been prejudiced as a consequence of the transfer of the subject thesis
and dissertation books to the University of La Salette from CHED-NCR?

2.      Re: Teaching Activities —

Whether or not respondent Perez’ teaching activities at the University of La Salette is violative of any existing law or rule?

“After a careful evaluation of the records, this Commission finds
that on the basis of the Memorandum of Agreement dated January 19,
1999, which respondent Perez entered into for the Commission on Higher
Education-NCR with Rev. Romeo B. Gonzales of the University of La
Salette, 1971 copies of thesis and dissertation books have been
transferred from CHED-NCR to the said University (Records, p. 85).

“In this connection, this Commission believes that in relation to
issue 1(a) above the contention of respondent that the subject thesis
and dissertation books do not constitute ‘records’ within the purview of
DECS Department Order No. 13-A dated February 3, 1988, does not hold
water. Said Department Order under its Definition of Terms (Article II)
provides:

‘Records. Any paper, book, photograph, motion picture, film, microfilm, X-ray films, sound recording, drawing map or other document of any physical form or character whatever or any copy thereof, that has been made by any entity or received by it in connection with the transaction of public business, and has been retained by that entity or its successor, as evidence of the objectives, organizations, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations or other objectives of the government or because of the information contained therein’ (Emphasis supplied).

“Thus, contrary to the claim of respondent, it is clear and
definitive on the basis of the aforequoted provision that the subject
thesis and dissertation books are ‘records’ under the contemplation of
Department Order No. 13-A of the DECS, since it cannot be denied that
the said books have been submitted to and received of CHED-NCR as part
of the supporting papers for applications of private institution of
higher learning for the issuance of special orders for graduation of
students from their respective programs at the graduate level, and that
the list of specific documents under the General Records Disposition
Schedule of said Department order is certainly not exclusive nor
all-embracing.

“Likewise the submission of respondent to the effect that in
allowing the University of La Salette to take possession of the subject
thesis and dissertation books, he acted well within his authority as the
then OIC of CHED-NCR, which had custody of the said books, and did not
commit any breach of any existing laws, rules or regulations on account
of said disposition of the subject thesis and dissertation books, yet it
cannot be denied that his authority on the matter, if any, is not
plenary, in the sense that his action or decision on the disposition of
unnecessary or useless records of the agency is subject to the approval
of his department head, as may be gleaned from Section 49, Chapter 12,
Book I of Executive Order No. 292, and the disposal of unnecessary or
useless records of an agency is subject to the audit jurisdiction of the
Commission on Audit (COA), compliance with requirements on records
disposition as prescribed by the Records Management and Archives Office
(RMAO), and submission of a report on such disposal to the said Office,
as provided in Sections 10 and 11 of Executive Order No. 301 (1987) as
implemented through Department Order No. 12-A dated February 3, 1988 of
the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS). Needless to say,
respondent Perez failed to comply with all of the said requirements
under the relevant laws and rules.

“Neither is it valid as a defense for respondent Perez to cite
the previous similar actions of his predecessor in office at CHED-NCR,
who has already retired from the government service, in having likewise
allowed in the past other schools to secure copies of the subject thesis
and dissertation books from the storeroom of CHED-NCR, for the simple
reason that such actions were clearly unauthorized and violative of
existing law or rules.

“Fortunately for respondent, in the present case it is evident
that in deciding on the disposition of the subject thesis and
dissertation books he was guided by good faith and imbued only with good
motives as borne out by the fact that his action on the matter had been
reduced unto writing, which he could have done surreptitiously had he
been motivated and/or disposed otherwise; and that in the ultimate
analysis, it is quite obvious that the transaction with respondent Perez
had with the University of La Salette on the subject thesis and
dissertation books, did not result in any disadvantage or injury to the
Government.

“For this violation, therefore, respondent Perez should be held
accountable and liable only for the light offense of NEGLECT OF DUTY.

“Regarding issue 1(b) above, the respondent submitted as part of
his evidence a copy of the Invoice Receipt for Property dated February
15, 1999, signed by him, for the computer hardwares donated to CHED-NCR
by the University of La Salette (Records, p. 64). Since the evidence
submitted was not considered as a sufficient proof to show that the
donated items were then properly booked-up as government properties, the
CHED Resident Auditor Ms. Luzviminda V. Rubico, State Auditor IV, was
requested to verify the relevant records in CHED-NCR and she submitted
the following report:

‘. . . the undersigned verified the ‘Certified True Xerox Copy’
of the invoice Receipt for Property from the original. I also accounted
the donations and verified the corresponding Memorandum Receipts. Order
donated units were not issued yet, hence no MR but were found to be
stored in the Office of the Director. Also found were two units overhead
projector, per Deed of Donation four pointers were listed but three was
(sic) actually counted. As alleged, the other printer was exchanged for
four scanners.

‘The donations were booked-up per JV No. 0523641 dated October
22, 1999 in the amount of P511 ,402.72. The printers and projectors were
booked up without cost’ (Records, pp. 66-76).

“On the basis of the aforequoted report of the CHED Resident
Auditor, it is clear that although belatedly, the donated computer items
from the University of La Salette had been properly booked-up as
government properties as of October 22, 1999.

“Accordingly, it is the sense of this Commission that respondent
Perez’ accountability on this issue is considered moot and academic.

“Anent issue 1(c) above, it is believed that the respondent’s
explanation to the effect that it could not have been possible for any
student to have been prejudiced as a consequence of the questioned
disposal of the subject thesis and dissertation books, for the reason
that the said records ‘were merely stored inside the storeroom’ of the
CHED-NCR, and the same records could not be systematically filed nor
properly maintained since the CHED-NCR does not maintain a library in
which the materials could have been housed and neither does the said
Office employ a librarian, should be considered as satisfactory. At any
rate, considering that the present complaint is anonymous, there was
simply no feasible way of determining the graduate students who may have
been prejudiced by the respondent’s action.

“Finally, the Commission found no contradictory evidence to belie
the denial interposed by respondent that he has been a regular
professor at the University of La Salette; nor on his admission that he
only occasionally conducted lectures on specific topics in the Graduate
School of the said University, for which, he was paid a token honorarium
of P500.00 for every lecture that he conducted, which was confirmed or
corroborated by the President of the University of La Salette.
Additionally, respondent points out that even assuming for the sake of
argument that he was a part-time professor in the said University, he
was, however, provided at the time with an authority to teach signed by
then CHED Chairman Angel C. Alcala .

“This Commission believes that on this specification respondent
Perez has not violated any law or rule, since his involvement of
conducting lectures on specific topics every now and then in the
Graduate School of the University of La Salette for which he was
correspondingly compensated in the form of a token honorarium, does not
constitute employment; and that, moreover, since the University of La
Salette is situated outside the territorial jurisdiction of CHED-NCR, it
is axiomatic that respondent Perez as the then OIC of CHED-NCR did not
have any direct supervisory or regulatory ascendancy or authority over
the said University.

“This specification should, therefore, be likewise set aside.

“WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is hereby recommended to His
Excellency, President Joseph Ejercito Estrada, that respondent Roger P.
Perez, formerly Officer-in-Charge of the National Capital Region of the
Commission on Higher Education, be REPRIMANDED for the unauthorized
disposal of the subject thesis and dissertation books at the CHED-NCR,
in violation of Section 49, Chapter 12, Book 1 of Executive Order No.
292 and Sections 10 and 11 of Executive Order No. 301 (1987), as
implemented by Department Order No. 13-A dated February 3, 1988 of the
Department of Education, Culture and Sports. It is further recommended
that the charge against the respondent for serving as professor on
weekends in the Graduate School of the University of La Salette be
dismissed for lack of merit.

“SO RESOLVED”.

After a careful review of the case, I concur in the findings and recommendations of the PCAGC.

WHEREFORE, and as recommended by the Presidential Commission Against
Graft and Corruption, respondent Roger P. Perez, formerly OIC of
CHED-NCR and currently Executive Director of the Commission on Higher
Education (CHED), is hereby REPRIMANDED for violation of Section 49,
Chapter 12, Book I of Executive Order No. 292 and Sections 10 and 11 of
Executive Order No. 301 (1987), as implemented by Department Order No.
13-A dated February 3, 1988 of the Department of Education, Culture and
Sports.

Adopted: 20 Oct. 2000

BY THE PRESIDENT:

(SGD.) RONALDO B. ZAMORA
Executive Secretary