Republic of the Philippines

Caloocan City

Sangguniang Panlungsod
COMMITTEE ON GOOD GOVERNMENT AND JUSTICE

INVESTIGATION REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION
RELATIVE TO

THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT FILED AGAINST PUNONG BARANGAY MILA

UY OF BARANGAY 164 THIS CITY BY ACTING PUNONG BARANGAY ALFREDO C.
DELA CRUZ AND KAGAWAD FERDIE SOLEDAD OF THE SAME BARANGAY FOR
NEPOTISM, ABUSE OF AUTHORITY, FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS,
AND MISCONDUCT IN OFFICE DOCKETED AS SPAC-0012-0722-003

THE COMPLAINT

The complaint stems from the alleged acts of Respondent Punong

Barangay MILA UY of Barangay 164 when she appointed close relatives as
personnel in the Barangay and used the funds of the Barangay to compensate
them as follows:

1. Myla Ladinis – Daughter- Barangay Clerk – Salary Php5500

2. Marian Gonzaga -Granddaughter – Barangay clerk – Salary Php 5500

3. Ruben Jarito – Brother – Barangay Caretaker – Salary 4.400

4. Marife Surio – Daughter In Law – TB Task Force - Salary Php 550. 

 Complainants also alleged that Barangay Clerk Marian Gonzaga and
Barangay TB Task force Marife Surio are Ghost employees in the Barangay since
they were never seen reporting for work but are regularly listed in the Payroll of
the Barangay and received their corresponding compensation. Complainants
saw such actions as clear a manifestation that Respondent Punong Barangay
Mila Uy abused her authority when she violated pertinent Laws including but
not limited to the Civil Service Law and the Local Government Code.
Complainants also included in their prayer that a Preventive Suspension should
be imposed on the Respondent while the investigation is being done.

THE ANSWER

In the verified answer submitted by the Respondent, she defended her act
of appointing her relatives as not a violation of Section 79 of RA 7160. This
according to her agrees with the opinion of the DILG (Marked as Annex 1”} in
which what was pertained to as illegal are only those appointive positions that
are considered Career Positions. As explained by her, the case at hand differs.
since the subject appointments are coterminous and not permanent, she
asserted that her appointees were exempted or not covered by the said
prohibition. ALTHOUGH SHE DID NOT DENY THE FACT THAT THEY WERE INDEED
HER RELATIVES. Respondent also gave the reason why the Barangay Clerk was
not seen in the Barangay Hall and insisted that she is not a Ghost employee.
According to the respondent, the Barangay Clerk was not being seen in the
Barangay Hall because it was during the pandemic lockdown. Being the Punong
Barangay, she has instructed her daughter (the Barangay Clerk) to adopt a work-
from-home scheme so that all clerical data needed by the Barangay would be
adequately encoded and attended to on time. As in the case of the TB Task force
member, the respondent stated in her answer affidavit that such a task or job
description does not require regular attendance or presence in the Barangay
Hall. Only when there is an activity for the TB task force to address, such is this
the only time that they are required to report.

 
 Respondent further explained that she is astonished why these
appointees of hers were being questioned by complainants when the truth of
the matter is complainants were signatories to the Resolutions confirming the
subject appointments. Respondent attached in her ANSWER affidavit Annex
documents marked as Annexes 2 to 5 as her proof that complainants were
aware or knowledgeable about it. Respondent allowed the Barangay Secretary
MS. Edelyn Esteban to testify in support of her assertions and on the validity of
the submitted Appointment Resolutions marked as Annexes 2 to 5. 

FACTS OF THE CASE

The Investigating body conducted a Preliminary Conference on the subject
complaint and made sure that all documents and evidence submitted by both
parties are sworn under oath. It was an established fact that the Complainants
were only made aware of the subject appointments when the complainant 1 st
Kagawad Alfredo dela Cruz acted as Punong Barangay because of a previous six-
month suspension meted to Respondent PB Mila Uy. Together with the other
Sangguniang Barangay members, Complainant Alfredo dela Cruz got to hold on
to some of the pertinent records of the Barangay. and were able to uncover
seemingly anomalous transactions. Amongst them are the payroll records of
the Barangay where the names of the relatives of then-suspended Respondent
Punong Barangay MIla Uy appeared. During the hearing and in her ANSWER
AFFIDAVIT ‘, Respondent Punong Barangay did not deny that the four
employees she appointed were her close relatives. There was an affirmation
from her that they are her daughter, Granddaughter, Brother, and daughter-in-
law. But she sees nothing wrong in her actions since those positions are
coterminous in nature and that there is nothing written in the law that prohibits
her from appointing them. To prove that the appointments of her relatives are
above board, Respondent submitted to this body four approve appointment
resolutions where the signatures of the kagawads were present. Even the
Barangay Secretary’s testimony favored the Respondent. She even testified that
those submitted appointment resolutions of Respondent PB UY were passed on
different occasions or dates of the regular session of their Sangguniang
Barangay . During this instance of the hearing, complainants contradicted the
statements of Respondent Mila UY and the Secretary of the Barangay Ms Edelyn
Esteban. They alleged that the Four Appointment Resolutions were spurious
and fabricated by the respondent and Barangay Secretary. Seemingly, all their
signatures were taken from another approved Resolution of the Barangay with
a different subject matter and were only cut and pasted to make it appear that
they signed and conform to the appointments of the Respondent’s relatives.
Given the seriousness of the allegations of falsified Sanggunian Appointment
Resolutions against the respondent, the investigating body amended the
charges on the Respondent to include Falsification of Public documents and
Misconduct in office. It also recommended a sixty-day Preventive Suspension on
Respondent Mila UY. Said recommendation was Adopted by the Sangguniang
Panlungsod given that the evidence of guilt was strong and the continuance in
the office of Respondent might serve as a venue to tamper the pieces of
evidence and influence potential witnesses. But due to the election ban period
in relation to the originally scheduled Barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan
Election for December 5, 2022, the preventive suspension was automatically
lifted on its twenty-seventh day simultaneous with the investigation. This is in
adherence to the prohibitions on Administrative Investigation as mandated by
RA 7160 and the Omnibus Election code. It only resumed when a new law was
passed rescheduling the Barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan elections to
October 2023. Upon its resumption, the Investigating body Issued an order
based on the motion submitted by Complainants requiring Respondent Punong
Barangay Mila Uy and Barangay Secretary MS. Edelyn Esteban to produce the
original copies of the contested Appointment Resolutions. However, none was
submitted to the body despite due time given to both Respondent and Barangay
Secretary. Verification was also pursued by the body to the Barangay Secretariat
of the City as well as the City Barangay Accounting Service. The two offices
yielded negative records of the four appointment resolutions. Nonetheless, as it
is also noteworthy, just a simple examination of the photocopy of the Four
Appointment Resolutions would confirm the allegation of complainants as well
as the testimony of the remaining Kagawads that the Four appointment
resolutions submitted to this body and presented by Respondent were spurious,
fabricated documents and copy-pasted from a different resolution. Substantial
evidence obtained by the investigating body points to the fact that there is no
legally APPROVED Sangguniang Barangay Resolution that concurred with the
appointments made by Respondents on her four relatives as employees of the
Barangay.

ISSUES and Recommendation

The issue that would have to be resolved in this complaint is WHETHER OR NOT
the subject appointments of Respondent Punong Barangay Mila Uy’s four
relatives in the Barangay were legal.

To be able to arrive at a sound judgment on the issue at hand we must

understand that the issue involved is purely a question of law and it relates to
the proper application of the following provisions of the Local Government
Code; viz:

Sec. 389. Chief Executive: Powers, Duties, and Function. — . . .

(b) For efficient, effective, and economical governance, the purpose

of which is the general welfare of the barangay and its inhabitants
pursuant to Section 16 of this Code, the punong barangay shall:

xxx     xxx     xxx

(5) Upon approval by a majority of all the members of the

sangguniang barangay, appoint or replace the barangay
treasurer, the barangay secretary, and other appointive
barangay officials; (underscoring supplied for emphasis)

The Code explicitly vests on the punong barangay, upon approval by a majority
of all the members of the sangguniang barangay, the power to appoint or
replace the barangay treasurer, the barangay secretary, and other appointive
barangay officials. This provision is reinforced, in the case of the secretary and
the treasurer, by the provisions of Section 394 and Section 395 of the Local
Government Code; to wit:
 Sec. 394. Barangay Secretary: Appointment, Qualifications, Powers and
Duties. — (a) The barangay secretary shall be appointed by the punong
barangay with the concurrence of the majority of all the sangguniang
barangay members. The appointment of the barangay secretary shall not
be subject to attestation by the Civil Service Commission.

Sec. 395. Barangay Treasurer: Appointment, Qualifications, Powers and

Duties. — (a) The barangay treasurer shall be appointed by the punong
barangay with the concurrence of the majority of all the sangguniang
barangay members. The appointment of the barangay treasurer shall not
be subject to attestation by the Civil Service Commission.

Verily, the power of appointment is to be exercised conjointly by the punong

barangay and a majority of all the members of the sangguniang barangay.
Without such conjoint action, neither an appointment nor a replacement can be
effectual.

While we agree with the Respondent that she cannot be charged with
nepotism since the mentioned prohibition in section 79 of the Local Government
code is not applicable to coterminous appointments, she still cannot be off the
hook. Her situation or case is much worst considering that substantial evidence
leads to the conclusion that she falsified, fabricated, and copy pasted Four
appointment resolutions concurring on her appointees who happen to be her
close relatives. The Investigating body finds Respondent Punong Barangay Mila UY
GUILTY ON THE CHARGES OF FALSIFICATION ON FOUR COUNTS because of these
acts THAT COULD ONLY BE ATTRIBUTED TO HER.

On the charges of Abuse of authority, it is a well-settled issue in

administrative proceedings that abuse of authority is present when a
misdemeanor committed by a public officer, who under color of his office,
wrongfully inflicts upon any person any bodily harm, imprisonment, or other
injuries. It is an act of cruelty, severity, or excessive use of authority…here the
Investigating body finds Respondent Mila UY NOT GUILTY.

On the charges of Misconduct on Respondent Punong Barangay Mila Uy.

“Misconduct is a transgression of some established and definite rule of

action, particularly, as a result of a public officer's unlawful behavior,
recklessness, or gross negligence. This type of misconduct is characterized
for purposes of gravity and penalty as simple misconduct. The misconduct
is grave if it involves any of the additional elements of corruption, clear
willful intent to violate the law, or flagrant disregard of established
rules, supported by substantial evidence.” Imperial Jr. v. Government
Service Insurance System, 674 Phil. 286, 298 (2011); Civil Service
Commission v. Ledesma, 508 Phil. 569 (2005).
Because of the Respondent will full intent to allow her relatives even without
valid appointments to be compensated by the funds of the Barangay , we find
Punong Barangay Mila UY GUILTY on the charges of GRAVE Misconduct.
Clearly, the acts committed by Respondent Punong Barangay Mila
UY by taking advantage of her position in appointing four of her relatives in
the Barangay even without the concurrence of the majority of the Barangay
Kagawads and thereafter when her act was discovered, she submitted
falsified appointment resolutions for the purpose of covering up her illegal
appointments on Four counts have indeed tarnished the integrity of her
office as Punong Barangay.
In the light of the foregoing, it is hereby Recommended to the
Sanguniang Panglungsod that Punong Barangay Mila Uy of Barangay
164 of this city be meted the maximum penalty of Six (6) months
Suspension from office FOR Four counts of FALSIFICATION and GRAVE
MISCONDUCT in relation to an administrative complaint DOCKETED AS
SPAC-CGGJ-021-118
Submitted this 28th day of November, 2022.

HON. MERWYN LENNON “WIN” C. ABEL,

Chairman

HON.TERESITA CERALDE,
Vice- Chairman
HON,RAY CHRISTOPHER ADALEM ,
Member

HON ALEXANDER CARALDE

Member

HON. ARNOLD DIVINA

Member