Dismissal from public service by reason of conviction for Bigamy - "It held that the applicable rules would be CSC Resolution No. 991936, or the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service (URACCS), which provide that the administrative offense of Conviction of a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude is a grave offense that is punishable with dismissal from service upon first commission."

Read - https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/29036/


"SC Affirms Dismissal of Former DFA Employee for Bigamy

August 4, 2022


The Supreme Court has affirmed the dismissal from service of a former employee of the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) who had been previously convicted of the crime of Bigamy.

In her Petition for Review on Certiorari, the petitioner assailed the Court of Appeals (CA) rulings which affirmed the January 5, 2015 Decision and September 28, 2015 Resolution of respondent Civil Service Commission – National Capital Region (CSC-NCR) dismissing her from service for the administrative offense of Conviction of a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude.

The petitioner was a former Secretary in the Passport Division of the DFA.

Her dismissal was spawned by a complaint-affidavit filed before the CSC in September 2002 by a complainant who alleged that petitioner and her husband contracted marriage while complainant was still married to the latter. This prompted the complainant to file a criminal case for Bigamy before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Lucena City. Petitioner and her husband pleaded guilty, resulting to their conviction for the crime of Bigamy.

In her counter-affidavit, petitioner alleged, among others, that her husband asked her to marry him when she became pregnant with his child, and that she had no knowledge of his previous existing marriage when she agreed to marry him.

The petitioner claimed that on July 29, 2004, the Labo, Camarines Norte RTC rendered a decision declaring the previous marriage of her husband null and void. Subsequently, on September 24, 2004, they contracted marriage in Tokyo, Japan. She said she was a victim herself and that she had no criminal intent in marrying him and did it only for the welfare of her child.

The CSC-NCR found petitioner guilty of the administrative offense of Conviction of a Crime of Moral Turpitude and meted the penalty of dismissal from service. The finding was affirmed by the CSC Proper. On further appeal, the CA affirmed the CSC’s rulings.

In a Decision penned by Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando, the Court found the petition “not meritorious.”

The Court noted that petitioner did not contest that she was guilty of both the administrative and criminal offenses. What she assailed was the CSC’s imposition of the penalty of dismissal from service upon the finding of her administrative guilty.

It held that the applicable rules would be CSC Resolution No. 991936, or the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service (URACCS), which provide that the administrative offense of Conviction of a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude is a grave offense that is punishable with dismissal from service upon first commission.

The Court held that the CA was correct in not appreciating the mitigating circumstances ― such as the length of service, first commission, and outstanding performance ― that the petitioner invoked. Length of service cannot be given weight since the subject administrative offense is a grave offense, punishable by dismissal from services.

Said the Court: “Bigamy cannot be taken lightly as its commission reflects the person’s character. It involves moral turpitude as settled in jurisprudence. Petitioner flagrantly disregarded the law in marrying Modesto despite her knowledge of his prior and existing marriage; as the appellate court aptly observed, this ‘shows her moral depravity and cast[s] serious doubt on her fitness and integrity to continue in the public service.”

As for petitioner’s invocation of first offense and outstanding performance, the Court ruled that such had no basis under the URACCS. It stressed that the Rules are clear in stating that a first-time offender shall be dismissed from service.

FULL TEXT: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/28775/

Xxx."

"