{"id":43017,"date":"2015-02-21T00:47:43","date_gmt":"2015-02-20T16:47:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=43017"},"modified":"2025-01-19T21:15:06","modified_gmt":"2025-01-20T02:15:06","slug":"ca-upholds-ombudsman-ruling-on-fertilizer-scam","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2015\/02\/21\/ca-upholds-ombudsman-ruling-on-fertilizer-scam\/","title":{"rendered":"CA upholds Ombudsman ruling on fertilizer scam"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Department<\/a>
Department of Agriculture (Facebook photo)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

MANILA — The Court of Appeals (CA) has dismissed the petition filed by an official of the Department of Agriculture (DA) who was penalized for his involvement in the controversial fertilizer scam.<\/p>\n

In a ruling written by Associate Justice Noel G. Tijam and released on Friday, the CA\u2019s Fifth Division denied the petition filed by Dr. Hector M. Sales, designated as Officer-in-Charge Regional Executive Director (OIC-RED) of the DA Regional Field Officer No.<\/p>\n

buy symbicort inhaler online https:\/\/drbrassie.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/symbicort-inhaler.html<\/a> no prescription pharmacy <\/div>\n

5 (DA-RFU).<\/p>\n

\u201cWherefore, the petition is dismissed.<\/p>\n

buy deltasone online https:\/\/drbrassie.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/deltasone.html<\/a> no prescription pharmacy <\/div>\n

The Ombudsman\u2019s decision, dated November 25, 2009 and the order, dated September 29, 2010 are hereby affirmed,\u201d the CA ruling said.<\/p>\n

buy pregabalin online https:\/\/drbrassie.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/pregabalin.html<\/a> no prescription pharmacy <\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

Concurring with the ruling were Associate Justices Mario V. Lopez and Myra V. Garcia-Fernandez.<\/p>\n

The Task Force Abono (fertilizer) discovered the fertilizer scam based on the paper trail of vouchers, receipts, reports and actual canvass of the price of foliar fertilizer.<\/p>\n

The Ombudsman for Luzon rendered a decision against Sales, Accountant III Evangelina Ruth D. Poloyapoy and Chief of Finance Division Nelia A. Sumayao when it found them guilty of grave misconduct and meted the penalty of dismissal from the service with cancellation of eligibility, forfeiture of retirement benefits and perpetual disqualification for reemployment in the government service.<\/p>\n

When they filed their respective motions for reconsideration (MRs), the Ombudsman modified the decision as it lowered the penalty against Poloyapoy and Sumayao from dismissal to one year suspension of office without pay while Sales\u2019 was denied.<\/p>\n

This prompted Sales to elevate his case to the CA.<\/p>\n

The CA turned down Sales\u2019 argument that he should not be faulted for signing the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) despite of the non-government organizations\u2019 (NGOs) non-compliance of certain requirements.<\/p>\n

Sales argued that he should not be held liable by virtue of the Arias Doctrine, a ruling on a criminal case that exonerated the accused for the acts made by his subordinates.<\/p>\n

However, the CA said that the Arias Doctrine is not applicable to Sales\u2019 case.<\/p>\n

\u201cArias is a criminal case whereas the instance case is an administrative case,\u201d the CA said.<\/p>\n

The CA said that jurisprudence clearly shows that the said doctrine only finds application to criminal cases.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe also agree with the OMB and the OSG that petitioner is administratively liable for grave misconduct,\u201d the CA added.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat is clear is that petitioner merely signed the MOA and left the task of scrutinizing the details of and the implementation of the MOA to his subordinates. Now, petitioner throws the blame to his subordinates claiming that he relied on their representations,\u201d the CA said.<\/p>\n

\u201cPetitioner\u2019s willful intent to disregard the pertinent COA rules and regulations and the provision of the MOA demonstrates his being inefficient and inimical to the government service, particularly to his designated position,\u201d the CA added.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

MANILA — The Court of Appeals (CA) has dismissed the petition filed by an official of the Department of Agriculture …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":43101,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[95,483],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-43017","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-news-ph","category-politics","mauthors-philippines-news-agency"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43017","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=43017"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43017\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":285992,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43017\/revisions\/285992"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/43101"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=43017"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=43017"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=43017"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}