Get Real : An ouster call in Batangas
Solita Collas- Monsod
Inquirer News Service
BATANGAS State University (BSU) president Ernesto de Chavez is using President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as his model in refusing to leave his post. Reacting to a demonstration by faculty and students who demanded that he step down, De Chavez said in a press conference held last Saturday: "Ang Presidente nga ng Pilipinas nira-rally araw-araw at gustong patalsikin pero hindi pa rin umaalis ... normal na 'yang rally dahil sa ekonomiya natin. Hindi ako aalis sa puwesto. [Daily rallies are being held against the President of the Philippines by people who want to boot her out, but she still doesn't leave ... those rallies are normal because of the state of our economy. I will not leave my post.] If I leave the post I will be charged of (sic) abandonment by the Board of Regents."
I guess misery loves company. But the parallel that De Chavez tries to draw is simply not there. Charges have been filed against him, formal investigations have been conducted, and after due process, Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo ruled last July 12 that "Respondents De Chavez, Lontoc Sr., Ligaya and Lontoc Jr. are hereby found guilty of Dishonesty and Grave Misconduct and are, thus, meted the penalty of Dismissal from the Service..."
The student-faculty demonstrations occurred because he refused to leave. In the Arroyo case, the demonstrations are being held to pressure her into resigning even before impeachment proceedings have followed their due course and before she has been found guilty.
Moreover, while Ms Arroyo recognizes the authority of Congress to impeach her and is ready to step down if found guilty by the Senate, BSU's De Chavez does not recognize the authority of the Ombudsman who, he claims, has no right to discipline him, because only BSU's board of regents (BOR) has the appointing and disciplining authority over him. To quote him again: "We are not even under the CHED [Commission on Higher Education] or Civil Service [Commission]. We have our own charter, 'meron kaming BOR' [we have a BOR]. We are with CHED but we are not under CHED. 'Hinihintay lamang namin ang anumang magiging desisyon ng Civil Service Commission at nakahanda kaming sagutin ito.' [We are just awaiting whatever will be the decision of the Civil Service Commission and we are ready to respond to it.]"
Whew. That's pretty arrogant stuff and fuzzy thinking. The Ombudsman does have administrative authority over all government officials, to which category state university officials belong. Yes, the BOR is the appointing power, but there are limits to its independence. In the case of the BSU, the BOR chair is CHED Commissioner Saturnino M. Ocampo Jr., with the chairpersons of the Senate and House education committees and the regional director of the National Economic and Development Authority as members. They are surely aware of their powers and responsibilities.
But what exactly did De Chavez and others -- including a brother-in-law who is BSU's vice president for academic affairs and a nephew (the brother-in-law's son) -- do to merit the dismissal? Per the Supplemental Resolution of Ombudsman Marcelo, first, there was the matter of the unauthorized collection of graduation fees, with no official receipts issued, and with the collected fees never deposited in a government bank for the account of the BSU.
Then, it seems, the De Chavez family (including a brother-in-law) was involved in the business of renting caps and gowns, and apparently used its members' position to become the exclusive supplier of these paraphernalia to the faculty and graduating students.
In addition, De Chavez and his nephew were found by the Ombudsman to have collected Internet fees from students (again with no official receipts) with the funds deposited in their joint account. The funds were transferred to the regular trust fund of BSU 18 months later, only after charges were filed against them -- but with a shortfall.
Furthermore, there are matters like the collection of on-the-job training and related learning experience fees (again with no official receipts and funds deposited in a non-government bank); the conduct of comprehensive examinations and the (unauthorized) collection of fees. The Ombudsman has also asked the Civil Service Commission (CSC) to look into charges of nepotism and other administrative issues.
Why then, despite the Ombudsman's resolution, dated July 12, 2005-finding De Chavez, et al., guilty of dishonesty and grave misconduct, with a penalty of dismissal-is De Chavez still in his post (and reportedly wreaking all kinds of vengeance)? Is the BOR, as some detractors claim, in his pocket?
Nothing Machiavellian here. The simple reason is that the Office of the Ombudsman did not send a copy of its resolution to the BOR with the request that the latter implement it-instead, the resolution asks the CSC to implement it. So the BOR is still awaiting formal notice from the Ombudsman or the CSC although it is informally aware of the decision and has already initiated consultations and made contingency plans, BOR Chair Ocampo said. CSC Chair Karina David says that her office is puzzled that the Ombudsman has asked them to implement what the latter should be doing itself, hence the delay.
A bureaucratic snafu? No. Ombudsman Marcelo is not dumb. It turned out that he issued the resolution while there was some legal question about his office's powers. But since then, the Supreme Court has come up with a definitive ruling that, indeed, the OO does have administrative authority over all government officials other than those who are impeachable.
So it is not the case that De Chavez is following in Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's footsteps. It may in fact be the other way around.
