Friday, September 29, 2006 DILG reinstates dismissed cop
THREE years after he was sued, demoted and then dismissed from service, a policeman was reinstated because he was charged with the wrong offense.
PO2 Ernesto Hobrero Jr. was ordered dismissed on Sept. 12, 2005 by the National Police Commission (Napolcom) Regional Appellate Board.
This was after the board modified an earlier decision of the Police Regional Office (PRO) 7 to just demote him a rank lower for the charge of grave misconduct.
In his decision dated June 26, 2006, Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) Secretary Ronaldo Puno “reversed and set aside” the previous decisions on Hobrero’s case and ordered him “reinstated into the service without loss of seniority rights.”
Back wages
“Since the assailed decision is null and void due to non-observance of due process, and also for being contrary to jurisprudence, he should be entitled to back wages and other benefits,” Puno’s decision read.
Hobrero got a copy of the order last Sept. 12.
The case was over an incident that occurred on Aug.10, 2003.
Cresenciano Ibarra of San Francisco, Camotes Island, accused Hobrero of being drunk and beating him up with the butt of a firearm.
Ibarra showed a medical certificate that indicated he suffered “contusions on the nasal bridge and right cheek and contusion hematoma on the left parietal area” that needed medical attendance for 10 days.
Based on these facts, Hobrero was charged with misconduct before the Regional Internal Affairs Service (RIAS) 7.
The summary hearing officer Supt. Edison Ardaniel, on Aug. 12, 2004, recommended the dismissal of the administrative case “for insufficiency of substantial evidence.”
But when it was submitted for approval to RIAS 7 Director Rolenson Grijaldo, the latter changed the charge from misconduct to grave misconduct and on Feb. 17, 2005, recommended that Hobrero be demoted.
Then PRO 7 director Eduardo Gador agreed with their findings and issued an order in March 8, 2005 demoting Hobrero.
Appeal
Hobrero filed an appeal before the Napolcom Regional Appellate Board.
However, the Napolcom RAB modified “by unanimous vote” the earlier decisions and dismissed him from the service.
In his appeal before the DILG, Hobrero said the board erred in rendering the decision.
“The appealed decision is flawed and failed to discuss why the resolution of Supt. Edison Ardaniel, who conducted a thorough investigation of the instant case, was overturned by personalities who had no occasion to observe the proceedings,” Hobrero said.
The DILG agreed with Hobrero and said “substantive and procedural errors were committed.”
Puno said that when the charge was changed from misconduct to grave misconduct, Hobrero was not informed and was not given the opportunity to comment or answer the charge.
Puno, in his decision, said misconduct should relate to or be connected with the performance of official duties and functions of a public officer.
Facts of the case showed that Hobrero was off-duty at the time, as he was not wearing his uniform.
He pointed out that this fact should be without prejudice to the criminal case he was facing.
The Office of the Ombudsman for the Military, though, has dismissed the criminal case, as stated in a resolution dated April 29, 2004. (MEA)
