6/5/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly Respondent took great offense at being referred to as a bachelor's degree holder, insisting that she was a certified public accountant and a law graduate.[29] She responded[30] to the memorandum on the same day stating that in the Philippines, a person who had a law degree and passed the bar examinations has a degree more than a master's, but less than a doctorate. She recognized that the university had the right to terminate her at any time, but insisted that there was no need to discredit her.[31] On 6 April 2006, Vice President Alamirew issued the notice of termination[32] to respondent. The notice alluded to the two instances when the Department of Accounting had to replace respondent in her course assignments. Part of the notice reads: Despite the efforts of the head of the Department, the dean of the faculty and myself to bring you on board, it seems that you are not fitting anywhere. On the contrary, to cover up your incompetence and personal problems, you are insulting students, the staff and the management in particular and Ethiopians in general in the class. In view of these facts, it will be difficult to expect any positive contribution by keeping you here any longer. But as per Article X Sub-article 2 of the contract, we are obliged to give you this three months advance notice as regards the contract termination. In the mean time, however, you are expected to duly carry the assignment which shall be given by your Department. Please note that if you continue insulting and abusing any of the students, the Department or the Faculty Community, we shall be forced either to invoke Article X Sub article 1 or bring you into the court of law. There is, therefore, to bring to your notice the fact that the University has decided to terminate your contract three months from now. In the mean time, however, you're strongly advised to have an iota of decency and behave rationally.[33] To this notice, respondent replied in a letter dated 7 April 2006, which reads: Dear Dr. Tena: You did it first! I only defended myself from all the insults I received from the students, the staff and management. I believe this is within my constitutional rights. I did not insult anybody! I cannot resort to such vile tactics because I am not an incompetent person, as you perceived me to be. All the incidents that had happened were the aftermath of your evaluation and as a subsequence, the defamation committed against me when you insulted me and fired me from my job before my colleagues. Your accusations are merely based on hearsays, and hearsays are inadmissible in evidence under the law. They remain allegations unless proven by substantial evidence under administrative proceedings and beyond reasonable doubt under criminal procedure. elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/60760 3/20