Silence means admission

It is totally against human nature to say nothing in the face of false accusation. This is the truism applied in this case of Dindo. In this case, it is also ruled that resignation of a court employee does not render the administrative complaint filed against him moot and academic.

Dindo was working as a Court Aide in a Municipal Trial Court (MTC) who was also fond of raising fighting cocks as a hobby that entails expenses for fish and poultry feeds. His immediate boss in the MTC was Judge Nida.

Since the latter part of 2006, Judge Nida had been losing money and other personal effects inside her chambers. She would notice that almost every week she would lose varying amounts from P1,000, to P3,000 inside her two wallets which she kept in the top drawer of the filing cabinet inside her Chambers during office hours. When she discovered that the cabinet can be opened even if it is locked she stashed her money in her attaché case. Nevertheless she still kept on losing money. Finally, on September 4, 2008 she designed a plan to entrap the culprit by putting up a video camera inside her chamber. But again she was frustrated because the camera went blank at the precise moment when the culprit could be identified presumably because it was shut down.

Hence Judge Nida just sought the assistance of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) to investigate the matter and asked all her employees not to leave the court premises until the agents had arrived and investigated the case. Dindo was the first employee to be questioned and fingerprinted. But when Dindo was about to be fingerprinted, he told the agent that he will just confess to the theft after the agent confirmed that the fingerprints can be traced on the doors and drawers inside the chambers. Thus he narrated to the agent the circumstances behind the theft and informed the latter that he used the money to buy feeds for his fighting cocks. Then he sought the agent’s help in asking for forgiveness from Judge Nida.

But the following day, Judge Nida nevertheless filed a complaint against Dindo for Gross Dishonesty. On the same day, Dindo tendered his resignation irrevocably effective immediately. While his resignation was subsequently accepted by the Office of the Court Administrator, the proceedings on the administrative complaint continued. Dindo was asked to comment on said complaint but he failed to submit any.

So Dindo was found guilty of gross dishonesty for which the penalty of dismissal is prescribed even at the first instance. The Supreme Court said that there is substantial evidence proving Dindo’s guilt. Besides, the SC said that Dindo’s failure to submit any comment or explanation to the charged shows that he is not interested in clearing his name or simply has nothing to say in his defense. Consequently there is no other choice but to deduce his implicit admission of the charge leveled against him. Silence is almost always construed as implied admission of the truth of the charge. The natural instinct of man impels him to resist an unfounded claim or imputation or defend himself. It is totally against human nature to just remain reticent and say nothing in the face of false accusations.

In this case, dismissal can no longer be enforced due to Dindo’s resignation. But such resignation did not render the case moot and academic. Thus in lieu of dismissal, whatever benefits still due him from the government should be forfeited except accrued leave credits. Furthermore he is disqualified from further employment in any branch or instrumentality of the government, including government owned and controlled corporations (Neol-Bertulfo vs. Nunez, A.M. P-1-2758, February 2, 2010, 611 SCRA 270).

Note: Books containing compilation of my articles on Labor Law and Criminal Law (Vols. I and II) are now available. Call Tel. 7249445.

* * *

E-mail at: [email protected]