CA upholds dismissal of 2 DSWD execs over release of P10-M PDAF

The Court of Appeals (CA) has affirmed the ruling of the Office of the Ombudsman that dismissed two officials of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) for their involvement in the release and use of P10 million in pork barrel funds of a Quezon City congressman in 2009. 

In a ruling dated May 31, the CA's Special Fifth Division dismissed the appeal of petitioners Mateo Montaño and Pacita Sarino against the ruling of the anti-graft office that found them guilty of gross misconduct, serious dishonesty and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.

However, the CA modified the Ombudsman's judgment of the two ex- DSWD executives to guilt of gross neglect of duty and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, which still merited their dismissal from and disqualification for re-employment in government service.

Montano was previously the DSWD's Undersecretary for General Administration and Support Services Group, while Sarino served as the assistant bureau director of the department's Protective Services Bureau.

The case stemmed from their involvement in the release and transfer of Quezon City First District Representative Vincent "Bingbong" Crisologo's Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) allocation worth P10 million to Kalookan Assistance Council, Inc. (KACI) in 2009.

The CA, through  Associate Justice Ma. Luisa Quijano-Padilla, disagreed with the petitioners' claim that the release of the lawmaker's funds complied with prevailing rules at the time of the disbursements to KACI, instead ruling that the procedure they followed "violated Section 75 of the General Appropriations Act."

"In the case at bar, there is no showing that KACI underwent the above procedure. There was no bidding or any other selection process conducted," the CA said.

The appellate court likewise found no merit in the claim that the release of Crisologo's PDAF to KACI followed internal DSWD rules and that the projects submitted to KACI received "favorable reviews" from the officers concerned.

In fact, three officials of the DSWD did not give a favorable recommendation for KACI's proposed projects for social services delivery for individuals in crisis situations, the CA said, citing the Ombudsman.

It was also "uncontested" that KACI had existing unliquidated cash advances at the time it proposed the projects, the CA said. "Thus, it was not qualified for fund transfer."

The CA likewise said the petitioners "did not present a shred of evidence to prove their defense" when they argued that there was a lack of substantial evidence against them.

CA Associate Justices Ramon Cruz and Amy Lazaro-Javier concurred with the ruling. — RSJ, GMA News