|
Wednesday, June 25, 2003
Ombud orders: Fire BIR division chief
By Grecar A. Nilles and Karlon N. Rama
CEBU -- For his failure to declare more than P5 million in bank accounts, an official of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) was ordered dismissed from government service.
Deputy Ombudsman Primo Miro approved Director Virginia Palanca-Santiago's recommendation to dismiss Nieto A. Racho, BIR-Cebu South special investigation division chief, for falsification and dishonesty.
Racho did not declare in his statement of assets and liabilities (SAL) for 1995 to 2000 that he has P5.8 million in at least three commercial banks in Cebu, the anti-graft office said.
A separate criminal case is also being prepared against him, according to office insiders.
As of December 1999, Racho claimed he only had P15,000 deposited in the bank. A year after, that rose to P1 million.
Racho's salary grade was listed as 24. Government employees with this grade get paid P20,823 to P24,752 per month, according to a salary schedule made by the Department of Budget and Management.
Racho was not in his office when Sun.Star tried to get his comment.
But in his counter-affidavit, Racho asked the anti-graft office what evidence he was supposed to contradict.
"Who should then be the complainant whom (I) should confront…Should it be the administrative officer, the reviewing director or the deputy ombudsman?" Racho said in his counter-affidavit.
Prosecutor, judge
He asked why the ombudsman acted as both prosecutor and judge in the administrative case against him, and said he was denied due process.
But Santiago, in her eight-page memorandum, said Racho was given the opportunity to answer the evidence, yet opted to invoke his right to remain silent.
"Due process is not violated when a person is not heard because he has chosen, for whatever reason, not to be heard. It should be obvious that if he opts to be silent where he has a right to speak, he cannot later be heard to complain that he was unduly silenced," Santiago said in her ruling, dated May 30, 2003.
In recommending Racho's administrative conviction, Santiago reversed the findings of Graft Investigator Pio Dargantes, who originally recommended the dismissal of the complaint.
According to Dargantes, there was no evidence the bank certificates were genuine.
But, according to Santiago, the authenticity of the bank documents was never questioned when Racho submitted his counter-affidavit to the complaint.
Instead, Racho maintained his intent "to remain silent."
Confronted
Santiago also observed that Racho's bank deposits are not proportionate to his and his wife's salaries as government workers.
She said Racho cannot just claim he did not know what evidence to answer, because he was furnished a copy of the anti-graft office's final evaluation report that was considered as the complaint.
"He was confronted with documentary evidence consisting of bank certifications and copies of his very own statement of assets, disclosure of business interest and financial connections. These were the evidence he was supposed to controvert. But he chose not to," Santiago said.
Santiago ruled that she found substantial evidence---the proof needed for a government employee to be held administratively liable---against Racho.
"Dishonesty inevitably reflects the fitness of an employee to continue in office and the discipline and morale of the service. In this case, the respondent has shown his unfitness to hold public office," Santiago said in the ruling.
"He miserably failed to observe the constitutional edict that a public office is a public trust and that public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, efficiency and loyalty." Sun.Star Cebu
(June 25, 2003 issue)
Want Sun.Star news on your mobile phone? Click here.
Write letter to the editor. Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here. |
|
|
|
 |
| click
to comment on this article or discuss it with other readers |
[return to top]
[home]
|
|
Senator Cayetano succumbs to cancer