SC lowers penalty for Coast Guard exec to suspension in Yolanda supply scandal

MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court has reinstated a Philippine Coast Guard official by reducing his dismissal to a suspension, stating that his role in procuring supplies for Typhoon Yolanda relief operations was free from dishonesty and corruption.

In an 11-page decision promulgated on Jan. 22, 2024, the high court partially granted Mark Franklin Lim II’s petition for review, determining that he was only administratively liable for simple misconduct for bypassing the public bidding process without approval from the Coast Guard’s head.

Prior to the reversal of the decision, Lim was found guilty by the Office of the Ombudsman and the Court of Appeals (CA) for guilty of serious dishonesty, grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service and was dismissed from service.

What happened before

The case stemmed from a complaint by the Ombudsman-Military and Other Law Enforcement Offices regarding the disbursement of P500,000 for office supplies and IT equipment. The Ombudsman noted that the disbursement lacked proper authorization and was made without public bidding.

Lim defended himself by stating that he was officially appointed as the disbursement officer for the Special Service Office on March 18, 2013, with the authority to disburse up to P500,000.

He pointed out that only P77,166.25 of that amount was flagged by the Commission on Audit due to questionable receipts and he has since settled the issue. Lim also explained that the emergency procurement was necessary due to the ongoing relief efforts following Typhoon Yolanda. 

This ruling of the Ombudsman was affirmed by Court of Appeals, which prompted Lim to file a petition before the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court ruling

The high court affirmed “with modification” the finding of administrative liability against Lim.

According to the high court, the Court of Appeals was incorrect in concluding that Lim was not authorized to be the special disbursing officer, citing written authority that designated him as such and allowed him to disburse P500,000.

However, the court agreed that Lim remains liable for not conducting a public bidding.

The court determined that Lim’s actions amounted to simple misconduct rather than grave misconduct. While he did violate procurement rules, the Ombudsman failed to prove that his actions were motivated by corruption or a deliberate intent to break the law. 

Furthermore, there was no evidence that Lim attempted to conceal or misrepresent the truth about the purchases.

“The Court rules that while the law on procurement has been transgressed here, it finds no substantial evidence on record that Lim concealed or distorted the truth regarding the purchase of the goods. Even the CA Decision is bereft of any discussion on how Lim was guilty of dishonesty, apart from a recital of the definition of dishonesty as provided by jurisprudence,” the court’s decision read. 

In imposing a suspension, the Supreme Court considered Lim’s 20 years of “untarnished service” with the Philippine Coast Guard and the Philippine National Police.