G.R. No. 193336 - OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, VS. ELMER M. PACURIBOT.DECISION - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, foregoing premises considered, this Office finds substantial evidence to hold ELMER PACURIBOT y MAGANA guilty of Immorality or Disgraceful and Immoral Conduct. In the absence of mitigating and aggravating circumstances, he is thus meted the penalty of NINE (9) MONTHS SUSPENSION pursuant to Sec. 52.A.15, Rule IV of CSC Resolution No. 991936, otherwise known as the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service, in relation to Sec. 54.b, Sec. 56.d, and Sec. 58.d, Rule IV thereof. On the other hand, the charge for Conduct Unbecoming of a Public Officer is hereby DISMISSED. Let a copy of this Decision be entered in respondent's 201 (Personal) File. Section 7, Rule III (Procedure in Administrative Cases) of the Rules of Procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman, as amended by Administrative Order No. 17, provides: xxxx An appeal shall not stop the decision from being executory. In case the penalty is suspension or removal and the respondent wins such appeal, he shall be considered as having been under preventive suspension and shall be paid the salary and such other emoluments that he did not receive by reason of the suspension or removal. A decision of the Office of the Ombudsman in administrative cases shall be executed as a matter of course. The Office of the Ombudsman shall ensure that the decision shall be strictly enforced and properly implemented. The refusal or failure by an officer without just cause to comply with an order of the Office of the Ombudsman to remove, suspend, demote, fine, or censure shall be ground for disciplinary action against said officer. Moreover, Memorandum Circular No. 61, Series of 2006 dated 11 April 2006 of the Ombudsman reads: xxxx The filing of a motion for reconsideration or a petition for review before the Office of the Ombudsman doc s .not operate to stay the immediate implementation of the foregoing Ombudsman decisions, orders or resolutions. Only a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) or a Writ of Preliminary Injunction, duly issued by a court of competent jurisdiction, stays the immediate implementation of the said Ombudsman decisions, orders or resolutions. Accordingly, the Regional Director of the Bureau of Local Government Finance, Regional Office No. X is hereby directed to IMMEDIATELY implement the penalty imposed against ELMER P ACURIBOT y MAGANA and promptly submit to this Office, within ten (10) days from receipt hereof, a Compliance Report, indicating the subject OMB case number. Compliance is respectfully enjoined consistent with Sec. 3 (e) of R.A. No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) and Sec. 15(3) of R.A. No. 6770 (Ombudsman Act of 1989). On April 21, 2009, respondent filed his Motion for Partial Reconsideration of the July 23, 2008 Decision of the Ombudsman seeking for the reversal of the judgment finding him administratively liable for Immorality or Disgraceful and Immoral Conduct and for the dismissal of the case against him. Respondent, in the same motion, asked