Ex-DPWH exec clarifies TRO stopped his dismissal

A former undersecretary of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) rectified reports yesterday that he was dismissed by the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission (PAGC), saying no less than the Supreme Court had stopped its implementation in June 2006.

Contrary to a PAGC paid advertisement that was published yesterday in The STAR, Salvador Pleyto said no less than retired Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban issued the temporary restraining order, while Court of Appeals (CA) Presiding Justice Ruben Reyes declared the PAGC order "null and void" in December 2006.

The former DPWH official said he tendered his resignation in December 2006 and that this was accepted by President Arroyo – who has direct control and supervision of PAGC – last Jan. 10.

"At the time of my resignation, I was not dismissed from the service," he said.

Pleyto, now a congressional candidate in the fourth district of Bulacan, insisted that the August 2006 PAGC dismissal order was a "patent nullity" for having been issued in gross disregard of Section 2 of Executive Order 12 which requires the signature of two lawyers.

Under the PAGC charter, or EO 12, Section 2 provides that "a majority of the members of the commission shall be members of the Philippine Bar." PAGC chairperson Constancia de Guzman and commissioner Teresita Baltazar are not lawyers.

According to his lawyer, former Agusan del Sur Rep. Roan Libarios, Section 4 of PAGC charter provides that administrative complaints involving a presidential appointee with the position of undersecretary or higher shall be conducted or heard by the commission en banc.

"The dismissal is too unjust and severe a penalty considering that the failure to file SAL is only punishable by suspension for the first offense," Libarios, one of the prosecutors in the December 2000 impeachment of detained President Joseph Estrada, stressed.

"Thus, the finding of PAGC, even if sustained by the Office of the President, cannot be treated as final and conclusive as to preclude the right of Pleyto to elevate the judgment of the CA for appropriate review as provided by the rules," he clarified.

"This harsh dismissal is not due to any involvement in a specific anomaly or scam. Neither was it due to any imputed participation in any rigged bidding, overpricing or any shady public works deal. Not even close," Libarios added.

In October 2005, the CA directed the OP to hold back the enforcement of the PAGC dismissal order against Pleyto, a career official at the DPWH who started out as civil engineering aide.

"The respondents (PAGC and OP) are directed to cease and desist from implementing the assailed resolutions (firing Pleyto)," the two-page order stated, signed by Presiding Justice Ruben Reyes and concurred in by Justices Vicente Veloso and Juan Enriquez Jr.

The CA issued the order after the DPWH official elevated his administrative case, where he was held liable for his alleged failure to declare in his statement of assets and liabilities, from 1999 to 2001, the business interests of his wife Miguela Guballa.

The magistrates granted the request for TRO "so as not to render academic the issues raised, and to preserve the rights of Pleyto pending disposition of the incident of preliminary injunction."

They also held that Pleyto, whose 40-year service remains untainted except for the SAL issue, appears to be "entitled to the relief demanded."