G.R. No. 170512 – 674 Phil. 416 – 658 SCRA 626 – Political Law – Constitutional Law – Bill of Rights – Due Process; Administrative Due Process – Opportunity to be heard; Right to confront witnesses
In 2001, Jaime Acero filed a complaint against Antonio Reyes and Angelito Peñaloza. Reyes was the head of LTO Camiguin while Peñaloza was a clerk at the same office. Acero alleged that the two connived in extorting money from him while he was applying for a driver’s license; that he failed the driver’s examination but was told that the two will amend his exam result from failing to passing if he paid an additional Php500.00.
The Ombudsman took cognizance of the case and treated it as an administrative complaint. The Ombudsman then directed Reyes and Peñaloza to submit their counter-affidavits which they did. Thereafter, the case was submitted for decision.
In September 2001, the Ombudsman issued a Decision dismissing Reyes from the service for Grave Misconduct while Peñaloza was suspended as it was found that he was guilty of mere simple misconduct.
The Decision ruled on the basis of the affidavits of Reyes and Peñaloza. Reyes denied any wrongdoing while Peñaloza admitted the allegations of Acero but he narrated that the mastermind was Reyes.
ISSUE: Whether or not there has been a violation of Reyes’ right to due process.
HELD: Yes. Based on the record, it appears that Reyes was not furnished a copy of the counter-affidavit of Peñaloza. In fact, after Reyes received the decision, he immediately filed a motion for reconsideration with an accompanying motion to set a conference for him to be given the opportunity to controvert Peñaloza’s allegations. But his motion was denied. Although administrative proceedings do not require trial-type proceedings, due process must still be observed.
One of the criterion of administrative due process established in Ang Tibay vs CIR is that the decision must be rendered on the evidence presented at the hearing, or at least contained in the record and disclosed to the parties affected. This was not complied with in this case when Reyes was not furnished a copy of Peñaloza’s counter-affidavit for him to be given the opportunity to refute the allegations of Peñaloza.
The essence of due process is simply to be heard, or as applied to administrative proceedings, an opportunity to explain one’s side, or an opportunity to seek a reconsideration of the action or ruling complained of.
