Bayron welcomes CA rule exonerating him | Inquirer News

Bayron welcomes CA rule exonerating him

/ 07:05 AM August 12, 2017

Lucilo Bayron

Lucilo Bayron

Mayor Lucilo Bayron of Puerto Princesa welcomed the recent Court of Appeals (CA) decision exonerating him of charges of serious dishonesty and grave misconduct and reversing an earlier ruling of the Ombudsman.

“Finally, the city government can now focus on providing better services and projects for our people, free from distraction and disruption caused by baseless and politically motivated cases against the duly-elected mayor,” Bayron said in a statement, following the CA decision overturning the Ombudsman’s order dismissing him from office.

ADVERTISEMENT

In a 17-page ruling on Aug. 8, the CA Sixth Division found that Bayron “could not be held liable for serious dishonesty” noting that there was “no deliberate or malicious intent” on the part of the mayor to hide his filial relation with his son when he signed the contract of services for the latter.

FEATURED STORIES

Moreover, the CA said, as earlier pointed out by the Office of the Ombudsman, “Karl (Bayron) was engaged to occupy a confidential position which is exempt from the rule on nepotism.”

Thus, the CA concluded that Bayron should be “exonerated” from the charge of serious dishonesty.

The appellate court also dismissed the charge of grave misconduct against him because he was acquitted in the criminal complaint for falsification of public document, considering that Bayron did not violate any civil service rule when he hired his son under a contract of service.

Prior to the promulgation of the CA decision, the Office of the Solicitor General filed a manifestation on May 3, 2017, arguing that there was “no substantial evidence” to hold Bayron liable for serious dishonesty and grave misconduct.—WITH A REPORT FROM REDEMPTO ANDA

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

TAGS: Court of Appeals, Ombudsman

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By continuing, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more, please click this link.