KEY POINTS: [1] Whether the mayor violated the explicit prohibition against nepotism. [2] Could the appointment of the mayor’s two brothers-in-law, assuming they were coterminous employees, be considered an exception to the ban? [3] Motive of the complainant -- politics or ill-will -- would’ve little to do with determining guilt or innocence.
WHAT COMPLAINT ALLEGES. Jonel Saceda, who uses the name “Inday Josa Chiongbian Osmeña” on social media, last Tuesday (January 24, 2023) filed with the Visayas Ombudsman a complaint of nepotism and other offenses against Cebu City Mayor Mike Rama, alleging he hired his two brothers-in-law at City Hall: Elmer Gimenez Mandanat as process server in the mayor’s office, and Gomer Gimenez Mandana as administrative aide/laborer at the city’s Medical Center.
The two Mandanats are brothers of Malou Gimenez Mandanat, who Mayor Rama married on October 28, 2021, more than 20 years after his first marriage to Atty. Araceli Lim Francisco was annulled. The brothers Mandanat were appointed for two periods -- first, from January 1 to June 30, 2022 and then from July 1 to December 30, 2022, when they were already the mayor’s brother-in-law, related third-degree by affinity – with the basic pay of P15,000 and P14,000 a month.
Saceda charged Mayor Mike criminally and administratively with nepotism, grave misconduct and graft and corruption, all arising from the alleged act of employing people he was prohibited from hiring.
JOEL SACEDA/INDAY JOSA. Except to his friends and followers on Facebook, Joel Saceda a.k.a. Inday Josa Chiongbian Osmeña, a resident of Punta Princesa, is not exactly a household name to the Cebu public.
Before his current brush with the mayor, he landed in the news only when he and another FB user, Johan Quirol Saludes (a.k.a. “Repos Agib”), were arrested on November 21, 2022, and later released on bail, for violation of the cybercrime law. The warrants were issued on the basis of a complaint filed in 2021 by then city councilor Niña Mabatid. The two had been calling her names on their FB pages since 2019, her first year in office, Mabatid alleged.
QUESTION OF MOTIVE. Saceda said he “felt sorry” for “at least 800” casual workers whose appointments were not renewed “after the Rama administration accommodated relatives of the mayor’s wife.” He denied that a politician was behind his complaint with the Ombudsman, stressing that he doesn’t belong to any political party. Many Saceda posts on FB, particularly during the 2022 election campaign, were critical of Rama and his Barug team. Recent ones were hurtful, including a January 12 header, “S.R.P. SINULOG NI RAMA PALPAK,” printed on black background.
Collin Rosell, Mayor Rama’s executive secretary, disagreed, publicly branding Saceda’s lawsuit “malicious.” (“Dili lang ni politika, malice.”) He said the Mandanat brothers were already working with City Hall before his marriage to Malou as they’ve been working since 2015. How will the Ombudsman reckon the relationship to determine the alleged nepotism: when they were first hired and no longer at the time they were rehired?
Whatever Saceda’s motive in filing the complaint, prosecutors and, later, the court will look largely at the law and the evidence.
WHAT IS PROHIBITED. Under the Administrative Code of 1987, the appointing or recommending authority, or the chief of a bureau or office, or the immediate supervisor anyone related to him or her within the third degree of consanguinity or affinity. If by blood, third degree will be one’s nephew or niece, uncle or aunt. If by marriage, as in Mayor Rama’s case, third degree will be his brother-in-law.
The Local Government Code of 1991 extends the prohibition to the fourth degree: first cousin or first cousin-in-law.
NOT-COVERED HIREES are teachers, physicians, members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, scientific and technology personnel, and primarily confidential positions, such as city administrator, executive assistant, private secretary, and driver.
Also under the exceptions are personal security of elective or appointive officials, personal staff of elective officials, department heads, other Cabinet officials whose tenure is at the pleasure of the president, and chairpersons and members of commissions and boards with fixed terms office.
Other than the specified professions and seats in boards or commissions, excepted are “primarily confidential” positions, “personal security” persons, and “personal staff.”
CLASH OF CLAIMS ON EXCEPTION. Complainant Saceda doesn’t believe that the Mandanat brothers occupy any of the excepted positions.
Atty. Rosell, insisting there’s no violation of the law, argues that the two men were appointed by Mayor Rama to coterminous positions, which is not prohibited (“dili na siya bawal”) because such positions, he said, are “imbued with trust and confidence... when the mayor steps down, they step down.”
Check the contrasting claims against the basic law on prohibition and exceptions.
A coterminous position is defined as an appointment to (a) a person whose tenure is limited to a period specified by law or (b) a person whose continuity in the service is based on trust and confidence of the appointing authority or head of the office or unit to which he is assigned.
The Mandanat brothers’ stint at City Hall are coterminous in the sense that each appointment is limited to a specified period – in that sense, all casuals and job order employees are coterminous and may even be terminated before the end of their term -- but are their positions one of trust and confidence to qualify for the exemption?
‘COMPREHENSIVE, ENCOMPASSING.’ A journalist-lawyer who’s a member of Cebu Media Legal Aid (Cemla) said that in Debulgado vs. Civil Service Commission, the Supreme Court said the law on nepotism is “so comprehensive and encompassing” that:
[1] It explicitly covers all appointments, without making any distinction between the kinds of appointments, “whether original, promotional, transfer or reemployment, regardless of status, including casuals and contractuals.”
[2] It covers all appointments to the national, provincial, city or municipal government, as well as any branch or instrumentality of the government, and all government-owned/controlled corporations.
[3} There are exceptions but it is “a short list,” which has not been added or subtracted from for the past 30 years. And it doesn’t contain words like “and other similar positions. The list, the high court said, “appears to us to be a closed one, at least until lengthened or shortened by Congress.” []