Republic of the Philippines

NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION

PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE
POLICE REGIONAL OFFICE 02
SANTIAGO CITY POLICE OFFICE
Victory Norte, Santiago City

SANTIAGO CITY POLICE OFFICE,

Complainant,

ADMIN CASE NO. SCPO-2016-001

-versus-

SPO1 BENJIE V. GALACINAO,

Respondent.
X------------------------------------x

I stand charged administratively for Simple

Neglect of Duty. This charge is anchored merely
on the basis of the fact that I was not around
during the inspection on 8 May 2016 at Abra
Elementary School where I was designated to
secure together with two (2) other co-policemen.
I did not abandon my post. I was so devastated
at that time because my wife did not understand
the nature of my work. She threatened me in no
uncertain terms to separate from each other. I
succumbed to a situation of “Damn if you do,
damn if you don’t”. Thus this-

POSITION PAPER

SPO1 BENJIE V. GALACINAO, duly assisted by the

undersigned counsel unto this Honorable Office, most
respectfully avers:

FACTUAL ANTECEDENTS

1. Respondent became a Police Non Commissioned

Officer in the year 2003. When he was starting as a
policeman, he was on the crossroad in choosing it as a career
for life or go on another field of endeavour. As fate would
brought him, his years as a law enforcer gave him this
altruistic feeling that made him decide to stay as a police
officer who shall at all times serve and protect the people. He
inched his way and rose from the ranks and he became a
Senior Police Officer 1 on 30 June 2016. In his twelve (12)
years in the government service, he received several
commendation and medals,[1] as follows:

1
PNP Personal Data Sheet hereto marked as Annex “1”.
2
 2. On 4 May 2016, respondent was informed by his
superior to the effect that he was one of the three (3)
policemen to be detailed at the Abra Elementary School
located at Barangay Abra, Santiago City to secure election
paraphernalias during the last 2016 National and Local
Election;
3. Respondent dutifully complied with the order of
his superior and since 4 May 2016, he together with PO2
Darwin M. Bulaqui and PO2 Florencio G. Ballad, secured the
said place twenty four (24) hours. Herein respondent did not
go home from said time until 8 May 2016;

4. In the evening of 8 May 2016, while respondent

was actively on duty at the said school, his wife suddenly
called via mobile phone and informing him that their child
was not feeling well and he had to go home because he was
out for four (4) days already. Respondent tried to explain the
nature of his job but his wife could not understand. They had
a brief quarrel until such time that the wife of the respondent
challenged him that they would instead separate. The
Sinumpaang Salaysay of Jocelyn B. Galacinao[2];

5. Respondent was so devastated considering that his

wife could not understand the nature of his work as a
policeman who must serve and protect at all times. He was
likewise worried because of the medical condition of his son.
He was anxious because his wife suspected him of doing
something bad by not going home for four (4) consecutive
days at that time. He was so confused;

6. Since at that time, respondent was with his two (2)

policemen companions, he decided in good faith and without
any intention to abandon his post to visit his family.
However, he informed his two (2) companions that he would
visit his family for a while because of a disagreement with his
wife and instructed them to be vigilant in securing the Polling
Center evidenced by the Affidavit of PO3 Darwin M.
Bulaqui[3];

7. Respondent went to his residence and explained to

his wife the reason why he could not come home and also
attended briefly to his child who was not feeling well at that
time. He returned immediately to his post after he was able
to thresh out matters with his wife. When he came back to
his post, he was informed that the City Director went there to
inspect;
2
Annex “2” hereof.
3
Annex “3” hereof.
3
 THE CASE
8. Culled from the records, herein respondent stands
charge of Simple Neglect of Duty more specifically “leave his
post or beat before the end of tour of duty of leave without the
required turn over to the incoming duty personnel” pursuant to
Rule 21, Section 2 (A)(1)(v) of Memorandum Circular No.
2016-002;

9. Respondent was subjected to a Pre-Charge

evaluation and was given the opportunity to controvert the
same. Eventually, a summary hearing ensued and during the
pre-hearing conference, he was directed to submit a position
paper;

ARGUMENTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Respondent did not abandon
his post. He was obliged to
perform his duty as a
husband and a father in a
manner that his duty as a
law enforcer was not
compromised.
10. In this instant case, respondent did not abandon
his post. It must be emphasized that there were three (3) of
them who were assigned to secure the polling center at that
time. His reason of going home for a while is justified by the
circumstances that happened during that time;

11. Respondent’s wife called him and he was

challenged by her to end their marital relationship. This is a
very big issue that must be acted upon immediately by him.
He had no choice but to go home for a while and thresh out
matters with her to save their marriage. It is a situation akin
to a damn if you do and damn if you don’t. He was polarized
by a delicate decision at that time;

12. Since he had two (2) companions at that time who

were there to secure the place, it was in his judgment done in
good faith that nothing untoward would happen. Indeed,
nothing untoward happened during his very brief absence at
the place;

13. Here, respondent did not just leave his post. He

made it a point that his companions knew about it and it was
4
just for a very brief moment. His leaving did not result to any
untoward incident and the security of the place was not put
into jeopardy. It must be remembered that respondent is also
a family man who loves his family as the foundation of his
life and his inspiration to attain greater goals ahead. The
preservation of his marital life is of utmost importance. On
this score, we beg the indulgence of this Honorable Office to
consider the human side of this case. It was a judgment call
and it can neither be right nor wrong. It was a testament to
his being a human, a husband and a father;

Assuming without
necessarily admitting that
respondent is guilty of
simple misconduct, the
same is his first offense
which may only be meted
with a penalty of
reprimand.

14. Here, respondent is charged of simple neglect of

duty which is classified as a light offense pursuant to Rule
21, Section 2(A)(1)(v) of Memorandum Circular No. 2016-002
referring to “leave his post or beat before the end of tour of
duty or leave without the required turn over to the incoming
duty personnel”;

15. Under the same Memorandum Circular, light

offenses may be punishable by a reprimand for the first
offense pursuant to Rule 22, Section 2 thereof. Considering
the awards and commendations received by the respondent
and considering further that no aggravating circumstance
attended the act, the penalty of reprimand is the correct
penalty to be imposed;

16. Lastly, there is no substantial evidence of

corruption or clear intent to violate the law committed by the
respondent;

PRAYER
WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed of this
Honorable Office to DISMISS the above-entitled case;

Such other relief and remedy that is deemed just and

equitable under the circumstances is being prayed for.

Santiago City, 21 October 2016.

5
 ATTY. LUCKY M. DAMASEN
Counsel for the Respondent
nd
Rm.215, 2 Flr, Heritage Bldg, Malvar, Santiago City
E-mail: lmdlawoffice@gmail.com
Mobile No.: 09178730405/Tel. No.: (078) 305-2392
MCLE Compliance No. V-008089/06-04-15
IBP No. 9629881/01-04-16/Ilagan,Isa.
PTR No. 1674409/01-04-16/Stgo.City
Roll No.37959/07-24-92

VERIFICATION

I, SPO1 BENJIE V. GALACINAO, of legal age, married,

Filipino and a resident of Purok 7, Barangay Rosario, Santiago
City, after having been duly sworn to in accordance with law, do
hereby deposes and states:

1. That I am the respondent in the above-entitled case;

2. That I have caused the preparation of the foregoing

Position Paper;

3. That I have read and understood all the allegations

contained herein which are true and correct of my
own personal knowledge;

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this

21 day of October, 2016 at Santiago City.
st

SPO1 BENJIE V. GALACINAO

Affiant
PNP No. 200302650B

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN before me this 21st day of

October, 2016 at Santiago City; Affiant exhibiting her identifying
evidence as required by the Rules; who signed the said instrument
in my presence. I further certify that I have personally examined
the affiant and I am convinced that the same is her own free and
voluntarily act and deed.

Doc. No. ____

Page No. ____
Book No. ____
Series of 2016