SC: Officials who test positive for drugs deserve 2nd chance
Government employees who test positive for illegal drug use must first be given the opportunity to undergo rehabilitation, the Supreme Court said, emphasizing that drug use, and the resulting addiction or dependence, is not just a crime but a sickness that requires treatment.
In a press briefing on Tuesday, Supreme Court spokesperson Camille Ting said the high tribunal upheld a Court of Appeals (CA) ruling that found Muntinlupa City engineer Carlito Salomon guilty of grave misconduct after he tested positive twice for “shabu.”
However, Ting noted that the Supreme Court suspended the penalties and instead ordered a retesting for Salomon.
For reassessment
If Salomon tests negative, no treatment will be required and the Civil Service Commission (CSC) may reassess the release of his benefits and his eligibility for future public service.
But if he tests positive again, he must undergo a drug dependency examination and enter an intervention program.
“Once certified fully rehabilitated and fit to work by his doctor, the CSC shall reassess his status,” Ting said, stressing that dismissal of a government employee is only an option “if they refuse to cooperate or fail the intervention program.”
Random test
The Supreme Court’s full decision in G.R. No. 260742, Carlito Salomon v. The City Government of Muntinlupa, has yet to be made publicly available.
Based on court records, Salomon worked as an engineer for the Muntinlupa City government during the term of Mayor Aldrin San Pedro, who took office in 2007.
In 2011, San Pedro issued an executive order implementing a drug-testing program that included both preemployment and random tests.
On March 2, 2011, a random drug test was conducted for the local chief executive, department heads, and selected employees, including Salomon, who was among 40-50 workers chosen from the engineering department.
Salomon later received a letter informing him that his initial test result was positive for drug use, prompting a confirmatory test.
Grave misconduct
That confirmatory test, however, yielded a negative result.
Two months later, another random drug testing was scheduled.
This time, Salomon’s initial screening again yielded a positive result for methamphetamine with a confirmatory drug test validating the result.
A preliminary investigation followed and Salomon was subpoenaed to submit a written explanation.
The city’s Board of Discipline (BOD) found probable cause and filed a formal charge of grave misconduct in September 2011.
He was preventively suspended for 60 days in 2012, and the BOD later recommended his termination from government service.
That same year, the Muntinlupa mayor issued a decision formally imposing the penalty of dismissal on Salomon.
He appealed to the CSC, which in 2015 dismissed his plea, a decision that was upheld by the appellate court in 2017.
Backed by evidence
According to the CA, substantial evidence supported Salomon’s dismissal for grave misconduct, citing San Pedro’s executive order issued pursuant to Republic Act No. 9165, which mandates that public officers and employees are subject to random drug testing, and that a positive result was grounds for suspension or termination.
The CA also ruled that the “random drug testing was thus valid as it was done in accordance with the set guidelines for the conduct of drug testing.”
“To repeat, when Salomon was randomly selected for a drug test, his sample urine was taken by the authorized representatives of the [Muntinlupa Drug Test Laboratory] and when the result yielded a positive result for methamphetamine, the result was submitted for confirmatory test to the accredited confirmatory testing center of the Department of Health,” the court added.
