Former Talisay City market collector guilty of dishonesty

CEBU, Philippines - The Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas has found a former collector of Tabunok Public Market in Talisay City guilty of serious dishonesty for falsification.

Graft investigation and prosecution officer 1 Marie Fe Frances Seville-Ang said there was enough evidence to hold Libertad Juban liable for falsifying documents in order to conceal the unaccounted and unremitted collections closed to P2.3 million.

 â€œWherefore, judgment is hereby rendered finding respondent Juban guilty of serious dishonesty. She is hereby meted the penalty of dismissal from the service with cancellation of eligibility, forfeiture of retirement benefits, perpetual disqualification from re-employment in the government service,” the decision reads.

 Since Juban had already resigned from government service in 2009, the decision said the penalty of her dismissal will be converted into fine in the amount equivalent to her salary for one year. The fine will be paid to the Ombudsman.

 The penalty will be deductible from Juban’s retirement benefits, accrued level credits or any receivables from her office.

 A complaint filed by the Public Assistance and Corruption Prevention Office  of the Office of the Ombudsman claimed that Juban tampered 620 official receipts from 2007 to 2009 which she issued to stallholders by changing the name of the payors and the amount paid.

 PACPO found out that the respondent did not remit collections amounting to P2,266,392.76 to the Talisay City treasury, claiming such act was equivalent to dishonesty.

 Juban, in her counter-affidavit, moved for the dismissal of the complaint, claiming there was a Deed of Assignment entered into between her and then Talisay City Mayor Socrates Fernandez that she would reimburse the amount.

 In the Deed of Assignment, the respondent made a partial payment of P150,000, leaving an unpaid balance of P2,116,392.76.

 With this, the Ombudsman ruled that Juban indeed committed serious dishonesty.

 â€œThe dishonest act caused serious damage and grave prejudice to the government. The dishonest act was committed several times or in various occasions. Clearly, from the foregoing, respondent committed serious dishonesty,” the decision reads.  (FREEMAN)