criminal cases is proof beyond reasonable doubt, while in administrative cases, only
substantial evidence is required. Moreover, the purpose of the administrative
proceedings is mainly to protect the public service, based on the time-honored principle
that a public office is a public trust. On the other hand, the purpose of the criminal
prosecution is the punishment of crime.44 Thus, even the dismissal of a criminal case
does not necessarily foreclose the administrative action against the respondent.45
cralawred
Finally, considering that the Court is reducing the penalty imposed on him from
dismissal from service to a mere 6-month suspension without pay, and that he is no
longer connected with PHILRACOM, petitioner should refund the salaries and all other
monetary benefits he had received equivalent to six (6) months with legal interest of
six percent (6%) per annum (p.a.) from finality of this Decision until fully paid.46 His
earned leave credits for the duration of such suspension are likewise deemed
forfeited.47 The Court stresses that his appointment48 as a trial court judge should not
be viewed as a sort of exoneration from such suspension that he should have served
while he was then PHILRACOM's Legal Department Head. Thus, in addition to the
refund of salaries and benefits, and forfeiture of earned leave credits during such
suspension, the Court sternly warns petitioner not to commit similar acts, otherwise, his
conduct may be construed as tainted with impropriety which shall merit the penalty of
dismissal from the service.
Moreover, in view of Section 5, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Judicial and Bar Council which
disqualifies from being nominated for appointment to any judicial post those with
pending criminal or regular administrative cases, the Court finds it necessary to
investigate whether petitioner declared in his application for appointment his pending
administrative case for grave misconduct and criminal cases for sexual harassment.
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals, dated
August 16, 2006, and its Resolution dated October 4, 2006, in CA G.R. SP No. 76959,
is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION, reducing the penalty for grave misconduct
through sexual harassment from dismissal from service to suspension of six (6) months
without pay, and with a stern warning that a repetition of the same offense shall be
punished with dismissal from the service. Considering, however, that petitioner Atty.
Jacinto C. Gonzales is no longer connected with Philippine Racing Commission, he
is ORDERED to REFUND the salaries and other monetary benefits he could have
received during the period of such suspension with legal interest of six percent (6%)
per annum from the finality of this Decision until fully paid. Further, his earned leave
credits during such period of suspension are also deemed FORFEITED.
Let a copy of this Decision be furnished the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) to
form part of petitioner’s service record. The OCA is hereby DIRECTED to investigate,
report and recommend the necessary action on whether petitioner declared in his
application for appointment his pending administrative and criminal cases.
SO ORDERED.
cralawlawlib rary
Velasco, Jr., (Chairperson), Brion,* Peralta, Reyes, and Jardeleza, JJ., concur.
Endnotes: