The Supreme Court (SC) has reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) that cleared a police official implicated in the anomalous purchase of 75 defective rubber boats worth P131.5 million in 2009.
In a 16-page decision by the high court’s Third Division, it affirmed the Ombudsman’s decision dated Jan. 9, 2013.
The decision of the Ombudsman found Police Senior Superintendent Luis Saligumba guilty of simple neglect of duty and meted him the penalty of six months suspension.
Saligumba took his case to the Court of Appeals that cleared him which prompted the Ombudsman to go to the SC.
The case is about the negotiated purchase of 75 rubber boats and 18 spare engines or outboard motors by the Philippine National Police (PNP). It was supposed to be for the police’s Maritime Group in its security and disaster operation efforts.
However, upon delivery, the PNP’s Maritime Group through its Technical Inspection Committee on Watercrafts discovered defects in the equipment.
Saligumba was a member of the PNP’s Inspection and Acceptance Committee (IAC) tasked to inspect deliveries, accept or reject deliveries, and render inspection and acceptance report to the head of the procuring agency.
He said he merely relied on the reports of higher ranking officials involved in the procurement when he signed that the deliveries conformed to the government specifications.
The appeals court said the official who recommended the approval for the purchase of the defective rubber boats was meted with only a month suspension and the one who falsified the bidding document was acquitted while Saligumba who only affixed his signature was suspended for six months.
“We see no reason why [respondent] may be held liable for the lesser offense of simple neglect over something that was beyond his scope of work,” the appeals court said.
The high court, however said Saligumba evidently neglected to efficiently and effectively discharge his functions and responsibilities when he admitted that he did not inspect the delivered rubber boats.
“While they are not mandated to exclusively inspect the items delivered, respondent and other IAC members should not have merely relied on the reports and instead confirmed such findings by personally inspecting the deliveries, especially since there were noted discrepancies from the report. Prudence dictates that respondent should have brought it upon himself to personally check the said items,” the high court said.
“Simple neglect of duty is classified as a less grave offense punishable by suspension without pay for one month and one day to six months. Thus the imposition of the penalty of six months suspension by the Ombudsman is proper,” the high court added. IDL
RELATED STORIES
PNP fires 10 officers in used choppers deal
CA exonerates cop implicated in PNP chopper scam