Pagaduan vs CSC

M. G.R. NO. 206379, CECILIA PAGADUAN V. CSC AND REMA MARTIN SALVADOR, NOVEMEBER 19, 2014 Facts: Cecilia (Pagaduan) filed a complaint against Rema (Salvador), the Municipa Budget Officer of Tuguegarao City, charging the latter for falsification and misrepresentation when she stated in her Personal Data Sheet (PDS) that she possesses the necessary budgeting qualification and indicated therein that she performed bookkeeping and accounting functions for Veteran’s Woodworks from 1990 to 1992 when she was never employed by the company. In her defense, Rema averred that that she was employed by Alfonso Tuzon, who was granted full management, direct supervision and control of Veterans Woodworks’ logging operations; her name does not appear on the VVI payroll because Tuzon’s office was independent of the original staff. Cecilia also filed a case for falsification of public documents before the MTCC of Tuguegarao City. On the administrative case, Rema was found liable for Simple Misconduct only and the CSC approved her qualification as it was a “related field”. Cecilia did not appeal this ruling. The MTCC subsequently convicted Rema for falsification of public documents; she did not appeal this ruling, instead she applied for probation which was granted by the MTCC.

Consequently, Cecilia filed a second administrative complaint against Rema, this time for conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude. In her defense, she alleged res judicata, forum shopping and double jeopardy, but the case proceeded, and she adopted her defenses in the criminal case. After hearing, the CSC Regional Office found Rema liable for conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude, and imposed on her the penalty of dismissal from the service. On appeal to the Civil Service Commission, the latter reversed and set aside the CSC RO ruling. Thus Cecilia elevated the case to the Court of Appeals, which initially sided with her, and stated that following precedents, a conviction for falsification of public documents constitute the offence of conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude. Rema moved to reconsider. This time around, the CA reversed itself,ruled in favour of Rema and agreed with the findings of the CSC that the act of falsification committed by Salvador did not involve moral turpitude as it was a mere error of judgment on her part.

Thus Cecilia elevated the case to the Supreme Court via petition for review on certiorari. ISSUES:

(1)

Whether

Rema

was

convicted

of

a

crime

involving

moral

turpitude.

(2) Whether her conviction and eventual discharge from probation prevent another administrative case to be filed against her. HELD: (1) YES. Not every criminal act, however, involves moral turpitude. The crime of falsification of public document is contrary to justice, honesty and good morals and therefore, involves moral turpitude. The court found that she made an untruthful statements in a narration of facts and perverted the truth with a wrongful intent. Considering that the principal act punished in the crime of falsification of public document is the violation of the public faith and the destruction of truth as therein solemnly proclaimed, the elements of the administrative offense of conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude clearly exist in this case. (2) NO. Probation does not erase the effects and fact of conviction, but merely suspends the penalty imposed. The purpose of the Probation Law is to save valuable human material, unlike pardon, probation does not obliterate the crime for which the person under probation has been convicted. The reform and rehabilitation of the probation cannot justify her in the government service. Furthermore, probation only affects the criminal liability of the accused and not her administrative liabilities, if any.