The Office of the Ombudsman granted the filed motion for reconsideration and dismissed the administrative charges earlier filed against former regional director lawyer Roland Calde for lack of merit.
In a 6-page consolidated order penned by Graft Investigation and Prosecution Officer III Lauren Gayle D. Divino-Sudweste and approved by Ombudsman Samuel Martires dated November 16, 2022, former Director Calde did not allegedly prolong the process of issuing the certificate of affirmation of embattled Indigenous Peoples Mandatory Representative (IPMR) Roger Sinot for the purpose of gaining any unfavorable ruling against the former but only for the purpose of settling the issues pursuant to the rules and guidelines prescribed for the selection of the city’s IPMR.
Further, the order stated that it is worthy to note that Sinot has not assumed office as the city’s IPMR as certified by the city council.
In addition, in Civil Case Nos. 8783-R and 8785-R entitled ‘Atty. Manuel Cuilan et al versus Roger Sinot et al.’ and ‘City of Baguio versus Roger Sinot et al,’ the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 6 issued a writ of preliminary injunction enjoining complainant from assuming or exercising authority as IPMR to the city council, thus, the delay in issuing the certificate attributed to Calde is justified by the circumstances brought about by problematic situation presented by the diverse ethno-linguistic groups in the city.
“Respondent (Calde) proceeded with extreme caution and circumspection precisely to avoid allegations of discrimination,” the order stressed.
Earlier Calde filed a motion for reconsideration that sought the reversal of the previous consolidated decision dated March 29, 2022 that found substantial evidence to hold him liable for grave misconduct, and meted him the penalty of dismissal from the service with cancellation of eligibility, forfeiture of retirement benefits and perpetual disqualification for re-employment in the government service.
In case the penalty of dismissal can no longer be enforced due to respondent’s separation from the service, the penalty shall be converted into a fine equivalent to his salary for one year, payable to the Office of the Ombudsman, and may be deducted from his retirement benefits, accrued leave credits, or any receivables from his office. The accessory penalties attached to the principal penalty of dismissal shall continue to be imposed.
Moreover, the complaint against Abilene Cirilo was also dismissed for lack of substantial evidence.
In his motion for reconsideration, Calde argued that the delay in the issuance of the certificate of affirmation to Sinot was not unjustified and was not meant to discriminate against him; that he did not transgress but instead did everything in his power as regional director to see to it that all the issues laid down in the protest were cleared and threshed out pursuant with all existing rules and regulations; and that he did not refuse to issue the certificate despite the favorable recommendation by the review body headed by lawyer Severino Lumiqued and by Officer-in-charge Harriet Abidang, rather, Calde was actually with caution and circumspection owing to the complexity and sensitivity of the issues raised in regard to the selection process of the city’s IPMR pursuant to the operating principles in resolving disputes in the said process, foremost of which is the primacy of customary laws and practices.
After re-evaluation of the records of the case, the Ombudsman granted Calde’s motion for reconsideration as he anchored his refusal to issue the certificate of affirmation on the appeal-protest that his office received concerning Sinot’s selection as the city’s IPMR.
Subsequently, the order stated that Calde created a review body to evaluate and make a recommendation on the selection process as he explained that when the findings and recommendations of the review body were in favor of Sinto, he remanded the protest to OIC Abidang of the NCIP Baguio City Community Service Center before the review body did not consider the seriousness of the allegations of discrimination and irregularities and if he would approve the recommendation of the said body, there would be no end to the controversy and it would make their office liable for violating their own guidelines.
However, instead of facilitating the settlement of the issues between the indigenous peoples of the city, through the customary practice of ‘tongtong/tabtaval,’ Abidang allegedly confirmed the regularity and validity of the city’s IPMR selection process amidst the issues raised against the same.
Ironically, the NCIP Baguio then inhibited from the ongoing proceedings and consequently, Calde issued another memorandum creating a body headed by Cirilo to look into the protest on Sinot’s election as the city’s IPMR and the latter then came up with a decision against the confirmation of Sinot as IPMR.