CA lowers penalties for Albay gov, wife
The Court of Appeals (CA) has partially granted the petition of Albay Governor-elect Noel Rosal and his wife, former Legazpi Mayor Carmen Rosal, as it affirmed their conviction for simple misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service but reduced the penalties earlier imposed by the Office of the Ombudsman.
In a decision promulgated on May 30, the court’s 15th Division ordered a one-year suspension from public service for Noel Rosal and nine months for Carmen.
“In the event that the penalty of suspension can no longer be served by reason of petitioners’ separation from the service, petitioners shall pay a fine equivalent to their respective salary for one year and nine months, payable to the Office of the Ombudsman,” read the decision penned by Associate Justice Germano Francisco Legaspi.
The sanctions were based on a complaint filed by Adrian Loterte, who identified himself as a media practitioner, before the Ombudsman against the Rosals and Clemente Aringo Ibo. He accused them of grave misconduct, grave abuse of authority or oppression, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, with a prayer for their preventive suspension.
Loterte alleged that Noel Rosal’s reassignment of department heads to other offices when he took over as Albay governor in 2022 was a “politically motivated action” intended to “harass or oppress them in the pretext of promoting public interest; was inconsistent with their official functions; [and] involved reduction of their status as they were reassigned to assist.”
He also questioned the appointment of Ibo as officer in charge of the Provincial Engineer’s Office and Bids and Awards Committee chair, claiming he lacked the proper qualifications.
In a resolution dated June 18, 2024, the Ombudsman found Noel Rosal guilty of grave misconduct, oppression and two counts of conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service. It ordered his dismissal from government service.
Carmen Rosal was also found guilty of conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service and ordered suspended for one year.
In partly granting the couple’s petition for review, the appellate court upheld the Ombudsman’s finding that the reassignment of the three employees amounted to constructive dismissal.
But it disagreed with the imposition of the maximum penalty of dismissal, finding no sufficient evidence to support the charge of grave misconduct.
The appellate court also found that Loterte’s claim that Noel Rosal acted with malice and blatant disregard for civil service rules remain “unsubstantiated.”
But it affirmed that his actions constituted conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service when it came to Ibo’s appointment.
The court noted that under civil service rules, “if a respondent is found guilty of two or more different offenses, the penalty to be imposed should be that corresponding to the most serious offense and the rest shall be considered as aggravating circumstances.”
“In the case of Noel, conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service is the more serious offense. Thus, simple misconduct shall be considered as aggravating circumstance. Noel should therefore suffer the maximum period of the penalty for conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, which is suspension for one year,” the court said.
