IN RE: ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS

Admin Case No RIASNCR- MP- ADM-17-067

Against FOR: Grave Misconduct

(Irregularity in the Performance of Duty)

PCINSP DIOGNES GAOAEN

PO2 Rodrigo Nidoy Jr.

PO2 Randy Sanoy

Former members of SAID- SOTG, Pasig CPS, EPD

Respondents

RESOLUTION

This is regarding the administrative case file against PCINSP DIOGNES GAOAEN, PO2 Rodrigo Nidoy Jr.
PO2 Randy Sanoy Former members of SAID- SOTG, Pasig CPS, EPD for an administrative offense of
Grave Misconduct (Alleged Irregularity in the Performance of Duty) as provided in MEMORANDUM
CIRCULAR 2016- 002.

The case’s facts are the following, that on or about 2:25 AM of November 14, 2016, at Phase 2 Villa
Monique, Brgy Pinagbuhatan, Pasig City, PCINSP DIOGNES GAOAEN, PO2 Rodrigo Nidoy Jr., PO2 Randy
Sanoy Former members of SAID- SOTG, Pasig CPS, EPD conducted a buy- bust operation against Cesar
Guanzon @Toto. The Confidential Informant (CI) introduced the poseur buyer PO2 Sanoy to @Toto.
They were able to obtain illegal drugs worth Php 500.00 which @Toto took form his coin purse
afterwhich PO2 Sanoy gave Php 500.00 to the former. However, when the suspect sensed that he was
dealing with a police officer, he immediately pulled out his handgun and shot PO2 Sanoy but missed. At
this juncture, respondent immediately pulled out his handgun and fired it towards @Toto. Pasig City
Rescue Team responded at the scene but declared the suspect dead by Dr. Jeffrey Bacalangco.

The issue to be resolved is, whether or not PCINSP DIOGNES GAOAEN, PO2 Rodrigo Nidoy Jr., PO2 Randy
Sanoy, Former members of SAID- SOTG, Pasig CPS, EPD followed the Rules and Regulation of the Police
Operational Procedure and their acts are under the Justifying Circumstances of the said provisions.

It is stated under PNPM- DO- DS- 3- 1 Rule 8, SECTION 2. Reasonable Force that “during an armed
confrontation, only such necessary and reasonable force should be applied as would be sufficient to
overcome resistance put up by the offender; subdue the clear and imminent danger posed by him; or to
justify the force/act under the principles of self defense, defense of relative, or defense of stranger”.
However it was also stated that it was further stated that “A police officer, however, is not required to
afford a person attacking him the opportunity for a fair or equal struggle. His duty requires him to
overcome his opponent. In the lawful performance of his duty, the police officer must stand his ground
to accomplish his mandated task of enforcing the law and maintenance of peace and order”.

And under, PNPM-DO-DS-3-2-13 Rule 8. Use of firearm during police operations it provides:

8.1 Use of Firearm When Justified

The use of firearm is justified if the offender poses imminent danger of causing death or injury to the
police officer or other persons. The use of fi rearm is also justified under the doctrines of self-defense,
defense of a relative, and defense of a stranger. However, one who resorts to self-defense must face a
real threat on his life, and the peril sought to be avoided must be actual, imminent and real. Unlawful
aggression should be present for self-defense to be considered as a justifying circumstance.

Further it is provided for in the Revised Penal Code under Article 11, para 1 - Anyone who acts in
defense of his person or rights, provided that the following circumstances concur: first. Unlawful
aggression; Second. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it; Third. Lack of
sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself.

Applying the aforementioned provisions of laws to the case at bar, it is apparent that the acts
committed by the police officers are justified. Although it is a well establish principle the duty of police
officers is to serve and protect the people, however, we should be mindful that police officers must also
take well care of themselves to better perform their duties.

After careful perusal of the records of the case, this Summary Hearing Office is convinced that herein
respondent has not committed Grave Misconduct ( Alleged Irregularity in the Performance of Duty),
when he shot the suspect after being shot first,as a result of self defense, has taken the life of the
suspect.

WHEREFORE premises considered, it is recommended that PCINSP DIOGNES GAOAEN, PO2 Rodrigo
Nidoy Jr., PO2 Randy Sanoy Former members of SAID- SOTG, Pasig CPS, EPD be exonerated from liability
since there is no clear and convincing evidence to support the alleged Grave misconduct (irregularity in
the performance of duty). Although it is true that police officers are to protect citizens, it is of greater
weight that they protect themselves in order for them to be able to serve the people better. There is
nothing wrong in sacrificing a few for the benefit of many. The loss of a life is never a good thing but if
losing such means that more lives would be saved, it would be worth the sacrifice.