Previous 5 / 6 Next

6 Affidavit-Complaint of Zenaida M. Gayaton. Rollo, p. 48. 7 "Hey, flawless, get away from there." 8 Affidavit-Complaint of Teresita G. Narvasa. Rollo, p. 44. Respondent was held administratively liable under CSC Memorandum Circular No. 19 series of 1994 which cites sexual harassment as a ground for administrative disciplinary action under the offense of grave misconduct. 9 Sec. 3 of Memorandum Circular No. 19 states: (a) Sexual harassment is one or a series of incidents involving unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favours, or other verbal or physical conduct of sexual nature, made directly, indirectly and impliedly when 1) Such conduct might reasonable be expected to cause insecurity, discomfort, offense or humiliation to another person or group; or xxx 10 Also under CSC Memorandum Circular No. 19 series of 1994. 11 Salazar v. Barriga, A.M. No. P-05-2016, 19 April 2007, 521 SCRA 449, 453. 12 CSC v. Belagan, 483 Phil. 601, 623 (2004). 13 CSC v. Lucas, 361 Phil. 486 (1999). 14 Republic Act. Section 53. Extenuating, Mitigating, Aggravating, or Alternative Circumstances. — In the determination of the penalties imposed, mitigating, aggravating and alternative circumstances attendant to the commission of the offense shall be considered. 15 The following circumstances shall be appreciated: xxx g. Habituality xxx j. Length of service in the government 16 Mariano v. Nacional, A.M. No. MTJ-07-1688, 10 February 2009, 578 SCRA 181, 188. Civil Service Commission v. Ledesma, G.R. No. 154521, 30 September 2005, 471 SCRA 589, 611. 17

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Narvasa v. Sanchez

Jurisprudence

Case number: G.R. No. 169449

Date of decision: Mar 26, 2010

Year of decision: 2010

GBV Case Type

Administrative Complaint

Nature of the case: The instant case stemmed from three cases of sexual harassment filed separately against respondent by petitioner along with Mary Gay P. de la Cruz and Zenaida M. Gayaton, who are also employees of the LGU. Consequently, the LGU’s Committee on Decorum and Investigation (CODI)'s investigation found the offender guilty of the charges against him and was reprimanded but CSC ruled by holding respondent guilty of grave misconduct instead of grave sexual harassment. CA found the offender guilty of simple misconduct but the same was reversed by the Supreme Court, thereby finding Sanchez guilty of grave misconduct and was ordered dismissed from the service with forfeiture of retirement benefits except accrued leave credits, if any, and with prejudice to re-employment in any branch or instrumentality of the government, including government-owned and controlled corporations. This is without prejudice to any criminal complaints that may be filed against him.

Summary of outcome: The respondent is found guilty of grave misconduct.

Respondent Benjamin A. Sanchez, Jr. is ordered DISMISSED from the service with forfeiture of retirement benefits except accrued leave credits, if any, and with prejudice to re-employment in any branch or instrumentality of the government, including government-owned and controlled corporations. This is without prejudice to any criminal complaints that may be filed against him.

Observatory: Gender-Based Violence

Affected Sector

Women

Ponente: Vidallon-Magtolis, J.

Long title: TERESITA G. NARVASA, Petitioner, vs. BENJAMIN A. SANCHEZ, JR. Respondent.

Geolocation 1

Latitude: 16.660555

Longitude: 121.369485

: Geolocation 1

Primary Documents

NARVASA.pdf
English
Download View

Commission on Human Rights

Select target paragraph3

Narvasa v. Sanchez

Primary Documents

Notifications