ANONYMOUS COMPLAINT AGAINST MACEDA
FACTS An anonymous complaint, was filed by University of Eastern Philippines (UEP) student, before the OCA charging Otelia Maceda, Court Interpreter, of (MTC), Northern Samar, of falsifying her attendance in court so she could attend law classes at UEP. It alleges: Maceda is enjoying the privilege of a regular employee and at the same time a regular law student, who has been going to school for more than 4 years. This is being tolerated by the Clerk of Court. Maceda has been habitually tardy and absent from office because she leaves the office everyday before 3:00 p.m. p.m. to go to class, since since the travel travel time time is 3hrs. The mode of transportation transportation to her school school is by means of water and land vehicles with a distance 70km away from Palapag, Maceda makes it appear in her Daily Time Records that she is still in office until 5:00 p.m. when in fact she is already in school Under Civil Service Law and Rules, falsification of DTR is an act of dishonesty a grave offense 1st Indorsement, the OCA referred the complaint to Executive Judge Jose Falcotelo RTC Laoang for investigation investigation and report. Judge Falcotelo’s Report Report Recommended the dismissal of the complaint against Maceda, considering that Maceda pursued her law studies for self-improvement self-improvement and that she merely relied on Judge Lagrimas’s permission. OCA directed Maceda to file her comment on the letter-complaint Maceda’s Letter -Comment -Comment Denied any wrongdoing in the performance of her job and reporting of her official time. She properly reported her daily attendance . Her only intention was to enrich her knowledge in relation to her work in the judiciary by pursuing law studies, for which she was granted permission by the judge of her court. OCA’s Report and Recommendations Recommendations 1. Matter be re-docketed as a regular complaint for Dishonesty 2. Maceda be found guilty of dishonesty and be suspended for 6 months During the investigation of this case, respondent was not represented by counsel . counsel . Respondent invokes her right to counsel as this regular administrative matter will affect employment with the Judiciary, her law studies, her future Respondent prays for sufficient time to engage the services of a counsel. ISSUE/S: W/N Maceda’s Right to Counsel has been violated? NO RULING: Maceda is guilty of Less Serious Dishonesty, suspended for 6 months and 1 day, and is warned of severe punishment punishment of the same same act. act. RATIO Admissio Admission n of of the docum cumenta ntary ev evidenc idence e attache ched to the let letter -complaint does not violate Maceda’s right to due
proc proce ess. ss. Maceda was accorded her right to due process during the administrative investigation conducted conducted .. She was given an opportunity to answer and be heard on the charges against her. Documentary evidence obtained obtained does not need Maceda’s consent consent These formed part of her employee records, which the OCA and the Court can freely access even without her consent. Maceda’s right to Counsel Counsel Maceda has knowingly and voluntarily participated in the administrative investigation conducted by Judge Falcotelo, by the OCA, and finally, by this Court. The administrative investigation began as early as bruary 2012 that that she i nsiste nsi sted d on on November 2010, 2010, but it was only in Maceda’s Manifestation dated F ebruary engagi ng aging ng the service servi cess of a leg leg al counsel counsel. Maceda’s request can no longer be accommodated this far along into the proceedings. Being a court employee and law student, Maceda is capable of understanding the charges against her and adducing her defenses herself.
A pa party in an an administ ini strat rative ive inquir inquiryy may or ma may not not be assiste ssisted d by coun counse sel. l.
The right to counsel under Section 12 of the Bill of Rights is meant to protect a suspect during custodial investigation.
Thus, the exclusionary rule under rule under paragraph (2), Section 12 of the Bill of Rights applies only to admissions made in a criminal investigation but not to those those mad made e in in an admi admi nistr ni strative ative investigation. While investigations conducted by an administrative body may at times be akin to a criminal proceeding, a party in an administrative administrative inquiry inquiry may or may not be assisted assisted by counsel, counsel, The right to counsel is not always imperative in administrative investigations because such inquiries are conducted merely to determine whether there are facts that merit the imposition of disciplinary measures against erring public officers and employees, with the purpose of maintaining the dignity of government service.
Mace Maceda did inde indeed fals falsif ifyy her her DTR DT R s and is, the there refo fore re,, guilty guilty of le less seri seri ous dishone ishonest sty. y.
Maceda’s Summary of Scholastic Records, showed that her law school subjects starts at 5:30 p.m. Hence, it possible ble f or M ace aceda to have have left the MTC MT C only at at 5:00 5: 00 p.m. was i mpossi
