G.R. No. 154155 - THE OMBUDSMAN, VS. BEN C. JURADO.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered; the undersigned investigators respectfully recommend the following: That criminal charges for violation of Section 3(e) of RA 3019 and Section 3081 of the Tariff and Customs Code be filed against the following officials namely: Emma M. Rosqueta Director Collector, Port of Manila Rolando A. Mendoza Chief, Miscellaneous Manufacturing Bonded Warehouse Division Alex Gaticales Executive Staff, Deputy Commissioner Ben C. Jurado Chief, Warehouse Inspection Division CBW Supervisor Juanito A. Baliwag CBW Supervisor George P. Dizon Senior Storekeeper All of the Bureau of Customs, and Rose Cuyos and John Elvin C. Medina Owner, Maglei Enterprises Private Respondents That records of this case be forwarded to the EPIB, this Office for the conduct of the required preliminary investigation That administrative charges for dishonesty and gross misconduct be likewise filed against the above-named BOC officials before the AAB, this Office. [6] On October 17, 1997, the OMB approved the above recommendation. On August 2, 1999, the OMB dismissed the criminal complaint for falsification of public documents and violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 3019 and Section 3601 of the Tariff and Customs Code filed against respondent. The complaint was dismissed on the ground of lack of prima facie evidence to charge respondent of the crime. On the other hand, on August 16, 1999, the Administrative Adjudication Bureau (AAB) of the OMB rendered judgment finding respondent administratively liable, penalizing him with suspension for six (6) months without pay. Respondent's motion for reconsideration of his suspension was likewise denied by the Ombudsman. Aggrieved, respondent appealed to the CA. In his appeal, respondent argued, among others, that his right to a speedy disposition of his case had been violated; that the administrative case against him should have been dismissed following the dismissal of the criminal charges against him; and that there is no substantial evidence on record to make him administratively liable. CA Disposition In a Decision dated July 3, 2002, the CA reversed and set aside the questioned decision and resolution of the OMB. The dispositive part of the CA decision runs in this wise: Foregoing premises considered, the Petition is GIVEN DUE COURSE. Resultantly, the challenged Decision/Resolution of the Ombudsman is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE . No costs. SO ORDERED.