Resorts World gunman tried but failed to convince CA to reverse dismissal in 2015

The gunman who attacked Resorts World Manila on June 2 had attempted to be reinstated in government service following his dismissal from the Department of Finance (DOF) only to be rebuffed by the Court of Appeals (CA).

In a decision dated October 27, 2015, the CA Special 17th Division found Jesse Javier Carlos guilty of dishonesty over allegations of amassing unexplained wealth which he did not declare in his statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN).

A former DOF tax specialist, Carlos was ordered removed by the Office of the Ombudsman on October 25, 2012 for grave misconduct and gross neglect of duty for not declaring his house and lot in Tondo, Manila in his 2003 to 2006 SALNs, and a sports utility vehicle in his 2007 SALN.

Carlos, whose total income from 2001 to 2011 grossed P2,460,156, was also found by the Ombudsman to have purchased, in cash, two farm lots in Tanauan City, Batangas for P4 million in 2010.

The Ombudsman also took note of Carlos’ liabilities such as car loans and his non-declaration of his wife's business interest in Armset Trading in his 2010 SALN.

Carlos filed a motion for reconsideration to the Ombudsman's decision but this was junked on October 25, 2014, prompting him to elevate the matter to the CA.

He argued that he was not given the opportunity to correct his SALN declarations and that there was no substantial evidence to support the Ombudsman's decision.

In its decision, the CA reminded government officials and employees to make a complete disclosure of their SALN "in order to suppress any questionable accumulation of wealth because the latter usually results from non-disclosure of such matters."

"In this case, given the fact that petitioner (Carlos) was not able to successfully overcome the onus of demonstrating that the properties identified by the Ombudsman to be undeclared in his SALN are owned by him and part of his unexplained wealth or that the omissions in his SALNs did not betray any sense of bad faith or the intent to mislead or deceive on his part, we are inclined to adjudge that petitioner is guilty of dishonesty," the appellate court said.

"Indeed, the discrepancy in the valuation of his declared and undeclared assets is too glaring for petitioner's omission to be written off as mere negligence or carelessness," it added.

Applying the rules under Civil Service Commission Resolution No. 99-1936, the CA said dishonesty merits a penalty of dismissal from the service even on the first offense.

It also slapped on Carlos the accessory penalties of cancellation of eligibility, forfeiture of retirement benefits, and perpetual disqualification for reemployment in government service.

The CA revised the verdict to dishonesty after it found no reason to hold Carlos liable for grave misconduct and gross neglect of duty.

Associate Justice Marlene Gonzales-Sison penned the decision, which was concurred in by Associate Justices Ramon Cruz and Ma. Luisa Quijano-Padilla.

The dismissal stemmed from a complaint filed against Carlos by the DOF-Revenue Integrity Protection Service with the Ombudsman in December 2011. —KG, GMA News