Scribd
Upload
84 views3 pages

Ignacia Balicas

The Supreme Court reversed the decision dismissing petitioner BALICAS from her position at the DENR for gross neglect of duty. The Court found that DENR regulations did not clearly define the specific monitoring duties of BALICAS's role. Meanwhile, laws clearly gave monitoring duties for housing projects requiring an ECC to the HLURB, not the DENR. As the landslide was from an adjacent area and duties were not clearly BALICAS's responsibility, she could not be found guilty of gross neglect. The Court reinstated BALICAS to her position with back pay.

Uploaded by

Nathalie Jean Yap
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
84 views3 pages

Ignacia Balicas

The Supreme Court reversed the decision dismissing petitioner BALICAS from her position at the DENR for gross neglect of duty. The Court found that DENR regulations did not clearly define the specific monitoring duties of BALICAS's role. Meanwhile, laws clearly gave monitoring duties for housing projects requiring an ECC to the HLURB, not the DENR. As the landslide was from an adjacent area and duties were not clearly BALICAS's responsibility, she could not be found guilty of gross neglect. The Court reinstated BALICAS to her position with back pay.

Uploaded by

Nathalie Jean Yap
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

BALICAS vs.

FFIB, OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN


G. R. No. 145972
March 23, 2004
FACTS: In the development of the Cherry Hills Subdivision (CHS), Philjas applied for
the issuance of ECC from the DENR-Region IV
Respondent BALICAS, PENRO senior environmental management
specialist, monitored the implementation of the CHS Project Development to check
compliance with the terms and conditions in the ECC. She conducted another
monitoring on the project for the same purpose. In both instances, she noted that the
project was still in the construction stage hence, compliance with the stipulated
conditions could not be fully assessed, and therefore, a follow-up monitoring is proper. It
appeared from the records that this August 23, 1995 monitoring inspection was the last
one conducted by the DENR.
Immediately after the tragic incident on August 3, 1999, a fact-finding investigation was
conducted by the Office of the Ombudsman through its Fact-Finding and Intelligence
Bureau (FFIB), which duly filed an administrative complaint with the Office of the
Ombudsman against several officials of the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board
(HLURB), Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), and the local
government of Antipolo.

The charge against petitioner involved a supposed failure on her part to monitor and
inspect the development of CHS, which was assumed to be her duty as DENR senior
environmental management specialist assigned in the province of Rizal.

For her part, petitioner belied allegations that monitoring was not conducted, claiming
that she monitored the development of CHS as evidenced by 3 monitoring reports .She
further claimed good faith and exercise of due diligence, insisting that the tragedy was a
fortuitous event. She reasoned that the collapse did not occur in Cherry Hills, but in the
adjacent mountain eastern side of the subdivision.

The Office of the Ombudsman rendered a decision imposing upon petitioner the
supreme penalty of dismissal from office for gross neglect of duty.

Petitioner seasonably filed a petition for review of the Ombudsmans decision with the
CA. The Court of Appeals dismissed the petition for lack of merit and affirmed the
appealed decision. It found that the landslide was a preventable occurrence and that
petitioner was guilty of gross negligence in failing to closely monitor Philjas compliance
with the conditions of the ECC given the known inherent instability of the ground where
the subdivision was developed. The appellate court likewise denied petitioners motion
for reconsideration.
This petition for review on certiorari
ISSUE: WON Balicas is guilty of gross neglect of duty
HELD: the petition is hereby GRANTED, The CA decision affirming the Ombudsmans
dismissal of petitioner IGNACIA BALICAS from office is REVERSED and SET ASIDE,
and petitioners REINSTATEMENT to her position with back pay and without loss of
seniority rights is hereby ordered.
NO
In order to ascertain if there had been gross neglect of duty, we have to look at the
lawfully prescribed duties of petitioner. Unfortunately, DENR regulations are silent on
the specific duties of a senior environmental management specialist. Internal
regulations merely speak of the functions of the Provincial Environment and Natural
Resources Office (PENRO) to which petitioner directly reports.

Tthe monitoring duties of the PENRO mainly deal with broad environmental concerns,
particularly pollution abatement. This general monitoring duty is applicable to all types
of physical developments that may adversely impact on the environment, whether
housing projects, industrial sites, recreational facilities, or scientific undertakings.
However, a more specific monitoring duty is imposed on the HLURB as the sole
regulatory body for housing and land development.

P.D. No. 1586 prescribes the following duties on the HLURB (then Ministry of Human
Settlements) in connection with environmentally critical projects requiring an ECC:

SECTION 4. Presidential Proclamation of Environmentally Critical Areas and Projects.


The President of the Philippines may, on his own initiative or upon recommendation of
the National Environment Protection Council, by proclamation declare certain projects,
undertakings or areas in the country as environmentally critical. No person, partnership
or corporation shall undertake or operate any such declared environmentally critical
project or area without first securing an Environmental Compliance Certificate issued by
the President or his duly authorized representative. For the proper management of said
critical project or area, the President may by his proclamation reorganize such
government offices, agencies, institutions, corporations or instrumentalities including the
re-alignment of government personnel, and their specific functions and responsibilities.
For the same purpose as above, the Ministry of Human Settlements [now HLURB] shall:
(a) prepare the proper land or water use pattern for said critical project(s) or area(s);

(b) establish ambient environmental quality standards;

(c) develop a program of environmental enhancement or protective measures


against calamitous factors such as earthquake, floods, water erosion and others;
and
(d) perform such other functions as may be directed by the President from time to time.

The legal duty to monitor housing projects, like the CHP, against calamities such as
landslides due to continuous rain, is clearly placed on the HLURB, not on the
petitioner as PENRO senior environmental management specialist. In fact, the law
imposes no clear and direct duty on petitioner to perform such narrowly defined
monitoring function.

You might also like