Diaz v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 203217, July 02, 2018 - Synopsis Only
The Case of Jose L. Diaz: Using Government Gasoline for Personal Use
Read about the case of Jose L. Diaz who was found guilty of dishonesty and violations of R.A. No. 3019 and the Revised Penal Code for allegedly using government gasoline for personal use. The Court emphasized the importance of integrity and honesty in public service and the need for disciplinary action to maintain the public's trust and confidence in the government.
Synopsis:
The case of Jose L. Diaz vs. The Office of the Ombudsman deals with Diaz's alleged use of government gasoline for personal use, which was discovered through the Supplies Ledger Cards (SLC) showing his withdrawals from February 1999 to March 2003. The Ombudsman found Diaz guilty of dishonesty and violations of Section 3 (e) and (i) of R.A. No. 3019 and Article 220 of the Revised Penal Code. Diaz argued that the findings were not supported by substantial evidence, and the dismissal penalty was too harsh. However, the Court of Appeals (CA) upheld the Ombudsman's findings, and the Supreme Court affirmed the CA's decision. The Court emphasized that dishonesty involves a disposition to lie, cheat, deceive, or defraud, and Diaz's actions showed a lack of integrity and honesty. Moreover, the length of Diaz's service and the absence of prior offenses cannot mitigate the gravity of the offense. The objective of disciplinary action is to improve public service and maintain the public's trust and confidence in the government.
Doctrine:
(1) The factual findings of the Office of the Ombudsman are generally accorded great weight and respect, if not finality, by the courts because of their special knowledge and expertise over matters falling under their jurisdiction. When supported by substantial evidence, their findings of fact are deemed conclusive.
(2) Dishonesty is defined as the concealment or distortion of truth in a matter of fact relevant to one's office or connected with the performance of his duty. It implies a disposition to lie, cheat, deceive, or defraud; untrustworthiness; lack of integrity; lack of honesty, probity, or integrity in principle; and lack of fairness and straightforwardness.
(3) When an officer or employee is disciplined, the object sought is not the punishment of such officer or employee but the improvement of the public service and the preservation of the public's faith and confidence in the government.