The Court of Appeals (CA) has dismissed the administrative complaint filed by actor, then mayor, and now Leyte 4th District Rep. Richard I. Gomez against several policemen who implicated him in the alleged illegal drugs trade in Albuera town.

In a decision promulgated last Jan. 23 and written by Associate Justice Eleuterio L. Bathan, the CA affirmed the 2019 decision of the National Police Commission (Napolcom) which dismissed the administrative case for grave misconduct, dishonesty, and conduct unbecoming of a police officer against Police Chief Inspector Jovie Espenido, Police Chief Inspector Leo Laraga and Police Officer 3 Hydie  Yutrago for lack of substantial evidence and legal standing.

In a petition for review filed by Gomez, the CA was told Napolcom committed an error when the police commission ruled that he has no legal personality to plead for reconsideration of the decision exonerating the said policemen of administrative liabilities.

Upholding the ruling of Napolcom, the CA said that “in administrative cases, appeals are extended to the party adversely affected by the decision, which refers to the government employee against whom the administrative case is filed for the purpose of disciplinary action, or the disciplining authority whose decision is in question.”

“The fact that the petitioner is the then Mayor of Ormoc City is of no moment. It is established that in administrative cases, a complainant is a mere witness. No private interest is involved in an administrative case as the offense committed is against the government,” the CA pointed out.

Citing a Supreme Court (SC) ruling, the CA said that “a private complainant in an administrative case has no right to appeal the decision of the disciplining authority.”

It also stressed that while the Revised Rules of Procedure before the Administrative Disciplinary Authorities and Internal Affairs Service of PNP states that the disciplinary authorities are obliged to  refer to the city or municipal mayors; chiefs of police or equivalent supervisors; provincial directors or equivalent supervisors; regional directors or equivalent supervisors; People’s Law Enforcement Board (PLEB); Chief of the Philippine National Police (PNP); and the Napolcom, “it is the Napolcom  that shall have primary jurisdiction over grave administrative cases defined and penalized under said rules.”  

In the administrative case against the policemen, the CA said it was the Inspection, Monitoring and Investigation Service (IMIS) of Napolcom  which found probable cause to file a formal charge against the policemen.

It is the IMIS that conducts continuous inspection and management audit of personnel, facilities and operations at all levels of command of the PNP, as well  Napolcom’s regional and field Offices; monitors implementation of programs and projects; and investigates police anomalies and irregularities.

“Considering that the petitioner (Gomez) has no legal interest or standing to appeal and seek the nullification of the assailed decision and resolution exonerating the individual respondents (police officers) from the administrative charge of grave misconduct, dishonesty and conduct unbecoming of a police officer, we thus find no need to delve on the merits of this case,” it said.

“Wherefore, the instant Petition for Review of Richard I. Gomez is dismissed. The Decision dated 28 June 2019 and the Resolution dated 24 July 2020 issued by the National Police Commission En Banc in S.D. Case No. R8-2017-0007 are hereby affirmed,” the CA ruled.