MOP, Bk 11, v.5, 504
B. CORRUPTION/DISHONESTY/DECEIT
- Respondent caused the preparation and approval by the CLSU Board of Regents (BOR) of a Revised CLSU Organization and Management Structure, creating the positions of three (3) Vice Presidents (for Administration, Academic Affairs, and Research Extension and Training) despite the vehement opposition of concerned faculty and staff members. In so securing such approval, respondent deceptively made it appear that consultations and dialogues were undertaken. Furthermore, respondent appointed/designated the three (3) Vice Presidents without specific functions and approval of the BOR, resulting in lack of coordination, unwise decisions, confusion, and inefficiency.
- Respondent offered new curricular programs and implemented curricular revisions without the prior approval of the CLSU Academic Council and BOR in violation of the university’s charter, rules, and procedures.
- Without considering CLSU’s financial condition, respondent granted scholarship to faculty members, resulting in heavy teaching loads to other faculty members, the assignments to thirteen (13) non-teaching staff of teaching functions, non-payment of overload pay, stipends and commensurate compensation to non-academic staff.
- Respondent leased/caused the leasing of CLSU’s food processing plant to the Central Valley Food Corporation (CVFC) at a great financial disadvantage to the university and despite a previous favorable bid tendered by VITRONI. In addition, respondent allowed the use of CLSU machineries and manpower for the development of a privately-owned land (Bravo Farm) for production of cotton in commercial quantity, but said venture failed resulting in losses amounting to hundreds of thousands of government money.
- Respondent’s ineptness in planning and management of university funds led to the termination of ninety-six (96) casual employees of long standing.
- Respondent, for a period of 1 year and 4 months, ran the university without an approved plan, and without submitting a printed annual report.
C. CONDUCT UNBECOMING A UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT
- Respondent allowed the operations by ranking faculty members, working on official time, of a marketing cooperative – which was without an approved constitution and by-laws – as marketing arm of the university’s food processing plant.
- Respondent was responsible for the unsettled back accounts of CVFC in the amount of P378,775.18, representing processing fees, and for the unsettled back account due from a relative of respondent for the lease of the CLSU canteen in the amount of P33,860.75.
- In 1987, respondent instructed one Adriano Saturno to file a request to purchase for CLSU chemicals without public bidding. The chemicals which were purchased from respondent’s own ELR Trading for P32,250.00 were later found to be unsuitable for the purpose they were procured. Likewise, respondent, who is not a procurement officer, bought or caused the purchase of 600 cuttings of passion fruits at P3.60/cutting although passion fruit production was not programmed.
- Respondent contracted/employed a whole orchestral/musicians without prior BOR approval, using funds intended for the CLSU’s Agribusiness Ventures (AGRIVEN) projects, but without entering the amount paid in the CLSU books of accounts.
- The CLSU administration, through respondent, collected contributions/donations from the faculty, staff, students, and private citizens for the improvement of the Lingap Kalikasan Park without proper authority from, and report to, the BOR. Reports reveal that beer was sold at the park and ranking CLSU officials were frequenting the place and drinking beer even during office
In an affidavit, respondent denied having inflicted bodily harm on Miss Cando.
- The old Organization and Management Structure of the CLSU was too centralized, hence its revision upon dialogues, consultations with, and the support of, different units (colleges).
- The three (3) Vice Presidents were merely designated
- The revision of existing curricular programs has always been with the approval of the proper body.
- The grant of scholarship to faculty members was authorized by the CLSU BOR.
- The contract of lease with the CVFC was entered into after Ms. Blanka Vetrone of the New World Manufacturing Industries, Inc., retracted her offer to lease the CLSU food processing plant.
- The development of the Bravo Farm was covered by a legitimate contract envisaged to generate reasonable profits for the university.
- The termination of casuals was the result of the DBM-imposed ceiling on the number of casuals to be hired/retained, coupled with funding constraint.
- The alleged unsettled account of CVFC was only P29,775.28 as said company was able to pay the amount of P190,000.00.
- On the alleged anomaly in the purchase of chemicals from ELR (Eliseo L. Ruiz) Trading, respondent claims he could not have instructed Mr. Saturno to obtain the chemicals from his family’s outlet as he was in Davao City from October 21-25, 1987, adding that upon being informed of the transaction, he immediately advised then COA Auditor Eleanor Bernardo to cancel Check No. 434207 for the payment of the chemicals.
- The procurement of the passion fruit cuttings for experimental purposes was based on the reports and requisition made by AGRIVEN officials.
- Collection/contribution/donation for the Lingap Kalikasan Park was voluntary, undertaken by his friends, faculty, and staff members. He issued a memorandum prohibiting the sale of intoxicating drinks/beverages upon being apprised of such activity.
In all, the DECS Secretary regards respondent’s acts indicated in his 1st Indorsement aforementioned as constituting grave offenses of misconduct, dishonesty, and/or conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.
- Respondent imprudently ordered the transfer of the functions of the CLSU’s Executive Vice President – a position then temporarily held by Dr. Marcelo Roguel pursuant to a designation order from the CLSU BOR – thus in effect arrogating unto himself the BOR’s authority to terminate the designation it conferred upon Dr. Roguel.
- The CLSU offered new courses during the summer of 1988 and the first semester of school year 1988-89 without prior approval/authority from the CLSU BOR.
- Respondent entered into a contract with the Central Valley Food Corporation even before its registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Consequently, CLSU virtually subsidized non-existing entity.
- Respondent gave undue benefits to the Bravo Farm when CLSU developed, pursuant to a Joint Venture Agreement, seventeen (17) hectares, instead of fifteen (15) hectares as provided in the contract. Among the interlocking transactions connected to this contract relates to the Crop Harvest Sales Agreement entered into by respondent with Fast Agro-System Technology where he then occupied a directorship.
- On the purchase of chemicals from respondent’s ELR Trading, respondent was indeed in Davao City on October 21 to 25, 1987, when the purchase took place, but the processing of the Requisition and Issue Voucher for the acquisition “dates back to September 29, 1987, and ELR Trading gave undated canvass of prices.”
- Respondent negotiated for some 600 pieces of passion fruit cuttings which later on wilter and died. Respondent admitted that passion fruit production was unprogrammed.
- Respondent unduly extended the contract of lease on the CLSU canteen to Mrs. Zenaida S. Santos despite her failure to pay, within the grace period provided for, the monthly rental and notwithstanding a stipulation for contract termination in case of such failure. The extension allowed by respondent resulted in the incursion by Mrs. Santos of back accounts.
- Respondent violated, in connection with the establishment of the Lingap Kalikasan Park, Republic Act No. 5546 prohibiting, subject to certain exceptions, the collection of contributions, whether voluntary or not or for any project, from teachers and students of public/private schools.
- A medical certificate described injuries on Miss Cando showing the occurrence of an unusual incident which is likewise the subject of a criminal complaint against the respondent.
- There are no substantial evidence to support the other counts.