Aide cleared of admin complaint

CEBU, Philippines - For the failure of the complainant to substantiate his allegations, the anti-graft office dismissed the administrative complaint filed against the administrative aide of the Municipal Assessor’s Office in Minglanilla town, Cebu.

Graft investigation and prosecution officer Vivien Santiago-Lumangtad found no evidence to hold respondent Margie Sellote administratively liable for misconduct for allegedly soliciting P10,000 from the complainant.

The complaint was filed by Romeo dela Calzada who alleged that sometime in April 2004, he went to the Office of the Municipal Assessor to inquire about his problem regarding a parcel of land in Minglanilla town.

He said a certain Elesea Lanojan introduced the respondent to him being the head of the Municipal Assessor’s Office.  During the course of their conversation, he said respondent allegedly offered to process the copy of his land’s tax declaration for P10,000.

Complainant never categorically mentioned that he gave P10,000 to the respondent but claimed the respondent issued a receipt “acknowledging payment” of the said amount. The receipt contained the words “Notarial Fee”.

However, up to the filing of complaint, Dela Calzada said he did not receive any document from the respondent.

The anti-graft office then summoned respondent to file her counter-affidavit but she failed to do so. With that, Lumangtad resolved the case based on the evidence of the complainant and ruled to dismiss the case for lack of merit.

She said the duties of the respondent being an administrative aide was to help clerical works, doing errands as directed by the supervisor and cleaning the office of the assessor and its premises and not to facilitate or process the release of a tax declaration.

Granting that respondent did solicit money from the complainant for the process of his tax declaration, Lumangtad said still it did not fall under misconduct.

“Misconduct is a transgression of some established and definite rule of action, or particularly, unlawful behavior or gross negligence by a public officer. To constitute an administrative offense, misconduct should related to or be connected with the performance of the official functions and duties of a public officer,” the decision read.

Lumangtad said she found the statement of the latter pertaining to the alleged solicitation of the respondent as implausible.

“Complainant’s averment that the respondent issued an acknowledgement receipt for P10,000 makes no sense at all considering that he did not even allege that he handed P10,000 to the respondent. Why would the respondent issue an acknowledgement receipt without payment?” she said.

She added granting that if the complainant indeed gave the respondent the said amount this would contradict the latter’s earlier claim that he belonged to a lower-class family.

“A person with limited means could not easily produce the amount demanded by the respondent. Hence, the complainant’s allegations must be rejected for being inconsistent and doubtful,” the decision read.  - /BRP (FREEMAN)