Sunday, May 13, 2007 SC junks appeal on payment of benefits for defunct police force members
THE Supreme Court (SC) has unanimously ruled that retirees of the abolished Integrated National Police (INP) are also entitled to the same retirement benefits as the retirees of the PNP.
In an en banc decision penned by Associate Justice Cancio Garcia, the high court denied the petition filed by former budget secretary Romulo Neri seeking a reversal of the Court of Appeals (CA) order for government to pay the Manila's Finest Retirees Association, Inc., represented by retired Police Colonel Felicisimo Lazaro, and other INP retirees their respective retirement benefits.
The appellate court's decision affirmed a ruling of the Manila Regional Trial Court (RTC) granting the same retirement benefits to INP and PNP personnel, holding that Republic Act (RA) 6975 which created the PNP "did not abolish the INP but merely provided for the absorption of its police functions by the PNP."
"It appears clear to us that the INP was never abolished or terminated out of existence by RA 6975. For sure, nowhere in RA 6975 does the word 'abolish' or 'terminate' appear in reference to the INP. Instead what the law provides is the 'absorption,' 'transfer' and/or 'merger' of the INP, as well as the other offices comprising the PC-INP, with PNP," the SC ruled.
"To bar payment of retirement pay differentials to INP members who were already retired before RA 6975 became effective would even run counter to the purpose of Napolcom (National Police Commission) Resolution 8 which is to rationalize the retirement system of the PNP 'to ensure that no member of the PNP shall suffer any diminution in the retirement benefits due them before the creation of the PNP,'" the high court added.
The SC further ordered the petitioning agencies such as the PNP, the Napolcom and the Civil Service Commission (CSC) and Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) to "immediately implement the proper adjustments on the INP retirees' package retroactive to its date of effectivity and release and pay the INP retirees the due payments of the amounts."
"The trial court's judgment forestalled multiplicity of suits which, needless to say, would only entail a long and arduous process. Considering their obvious advanced years, the respondents can hardly afford another protracted proceedings. It is thus for this Court to already write finis to this case," said the SC.
The Court said the CA correctly ruled that the retirement of INP personnel prior to the passage of RA 6975 did not exclude them from the benefits provided by the law as amended by RA 8551 since their membership in the INP was an antecedent fact that nonetheless allowed them to avail themselves of the benefits of the subsequent laws.
RA 6975 considered them as PNP members and always referring to their membership and service in the INP in providing for their retirement benefits, the SC said.
The PNP was created to erase the stigma spawned by the militarization of the police force under the PC-INP structure.
In their petition, the government agencies appealed the decision of the CA and the Manila RTC, claiming that RA 6975 "clearly abolished the INP and created in its stead a new police force and since the INP is entirely different from the PNP they cannot avail themselves of retirement benefits accorded to the PNP."
The disparity over the benefits of INP retirees was brought to the attention of the courts when respondent association filed a suit for declaratory relief impleading the Department of Budget and Management (DBM), Napolcom, CSC and GSIS against the unconscionable and arbitrary treatment of retirees.
Retired police officers claimed that the disparity in compensation between INP and PNP personnel was between four to five-digit mark. (ECV/Sunnex)
