CASE # 1

AN ISLAND FIRESTORM

This is a case of a beautiful island originally with pristine water. This island, however,
became polluted and the studies of a government Chemist showed that there is a high
coliform (bacteria found in human waste) in the sea water.

The high bacteria content was brought about by the seepage of the sewerage system of the
different resorts into the sea water. The pollution made the sea water unsafe for swimming
because this will inevitably affect the health of the people.

A meeting was called by the local officials of the island to discuss the problem. It was
suggested that the island be closed to both local and foreign tourists. Some officials,
however, tried to cover up the problem and were saying that coliform might have already
gone down because of the lapse of time when the study was conducted. They apologized
to the public and declared it safe to swim again in the waters.

However, there was one official who justified the warning. He pointed out the following:

1. Exactly 21 of the 27 res lots in the island are facing closure due to lack of environmental
clearance.

2. Of the 23 conditions on sanitation, garbage and water disposal prescribed by the agency
on natural resources and environment, 21 have been violated.
Some officials say that the conclusion that the waters are safe were saying that the
coliform might have been washed away following the 6 months after the analysis of the
Chemist. The others on the other hand claim that the coliforms might have increased
considering the increased number of tourists visiting the island. More people, more
pollution. In addition, bacteria and other organisms seem to thrive better in summer when
the water is warm.

If you were the official concerned, what would you do after knowing the findings of the
chemist? How would you show your commitment to public interest in this case?
If I were the official concerned, I would:

1. Close the island from local and foreign tourists. I will also declare a no swimming ban for
6 months.

2. Require all tourist establishments to conform with laws on sanitation, garbage and
water disposal.

1 of 12
3. Have all sewerage systems of all resorts inspected to check that there is no seepage in
their sewerage system.

4. Require all establishments to secure an environmental clearance.

5. Request for another Chemist analysis of the coliform level of the sea waters.
All the aforesaid measures will be taken to safeguard the safety of the public in so far as
their health is concerned.

These will also protect the environment to ensure the sustainability of the use of the
beautiful tourist spot in the locality. The income of those in the resort business and their
employees will greatly help improve the economy of the community.

All these will have positive ripple effects for the interest of the public. These are also clear-
cut manifestations of my commitment to public interest.

1 of 12
 CASE # 2

WANTED DEAD HEROES

DENR has issued a directive on the banning of cutting trees considered endangered and
facing extinction. One of these species is the Narra tree.

To help implement the directive, DENR posted forest guards in strategic places in the
country to serve as checkpoints. Loading vehicles are required to stop for inspection. The
guards check the documents presented before the truck passes thru the checkpoints.

The case presented is that of illegal logging which was intercepted by the DENR forest
guards in South Cotabato. The guards were headed by Rick during their duty.

When Ricked stopped the cargo truck, he came to know that it was an army truck and was
headed by Col. Alonzo. Rick noticed that they were outnumbered. When he checked the
cargo, he found out that these were flitches of Narra and without the necessary
documents.

Rick asked Col. Alonzo why they illegally logged. The latter said that he needs money to
bury his men and to give to the bereaved families. Rick was therefore placed in a quandary
on what to do considering the danger Rick's group was in.

Question: if you were in Rick's shoes how will you respond to the situation?

Will you allow Alonzo to pass through or not? Why and why not?

If I were Rick i will tell Col. Alonzo that his cargo will not be allowed to leave the checkpoint
since it is illegal. I will explain to him the DENR directive.
However, if Col. Alonzo and his group are insistent and threatens to use their firearms
against us, I shall allow their pass to avoid the deaths of our group members.
I shall, however, submit an incident report to our office regarding the matter so that proper
action against Col. Alonzo shall be taken.

1 of 12
 CASE # 3

WHAT ELSE CAN I DO?

Do you agree with Glenda? Why? Is whistle blowing to the media and to an elected national
official acceptable?

As public servants, it is our responsibility to uphold the highest ethical standards in public
service, being accountable to the people and discharging our duties with integrity,
competence, and loyalty. This includes exposing any form of corruption, including graft,
fraudulent activities, and abuse of power.

Whistleblowing is a crucial act that helps to combat corruption and ensure accountability.
However, it is a serious matter that can come with negative consequences for the
whistleblower.

In this case, Glenda discussed to Sol her problem in the office regarding her boss/ division
chief asking her to prepare documents for environmental impact study to justify allowing
ACME mining company to start an open- mining pit in an area where she had no time to
conduct a proper environmental impact study. According to Glenda, the paper they gave
her as basis for justifying the grant is a quickie consultant report showing that the
environmental impact will be minimal. Glenda told Sol that they are not following the
guidelines under the existing regulation. ACME mining company cannot have a permit from
their bureau without a proper environmental impact assessment (EIA) clearance. The
document clears the particular project that the effects of the proposed project do not pose
hazard to the environment or to each surrounding community. The engineer of the project
or their consultants prepare the EIA
According to Glenda it is their job to initiate consultation, dialogue, representations and
surveys before they give their final nod.

In this particular situation however, Sol is asked to prepare the justifications to allow acme
open pit mining.

If I were Sol, I will not prepare the justification allowing the open pit mining of ACME
considering the that guideline on the certification of environmental impact was not subject
to the proper procedure and consultation. This might negatively impact the community and
immediate environment.

I will elevate my concern on the baseless instruction of my division chief to the DENR
secretary thru the head of our bureau.

1 of 12
If the secretary of our dept. will instruct me to prepare the EIA without following the proper
procedure. I will prepare provided the instructions must be in writing. So that if a case will
be filed against me for not following the protocol I shall be absolve.

If I were Glenda, and I want to whistle blow I still should first follow protocol by following
the above suggested steps. It is better that the Dept. Sec. thru the Bureau Chief knows first
my concerns before this is brought to the attention of media or Senator Enriquez.

1 of 12
 CASE # 4

PICK ME UP

If you are in Ronnie’s shoes, what would you do?

In a situation where Ms. Santos gave Ronnie a cash gift as a token of appreciation for his
prompt and effective service, Ronnie is torn about whether to accept it or not. As an
employee, Ronnie's primary concern is his family's well-being, and the gift could be a
significant help. However, accepting gifts from clients is prohibited by law, as defined in RA
6713.

According to RA 6713, gifts include anything or right given gratuitously or in favor of

another. The law also prohibits public officials and employees from soliciting or accepting
gifts, favors, or entertainment from anyone in connection with their official duties or
transactions. Violation of this law can lead to dismissal.

Additionally, RA 3019 considers requesting or accepting gifts in connection with

government contracts or transactions as a corrupt act punishable by law. Both the person
giving the gift and the public officer involved can be prosecuted and subject to penalties.

If I were Ronnie, I will not accept the gift. Although the law allows for gifts of nominal value,
it's better to lean on the side of caution and decline the gift to avoid any potential
controversy or embarrassment.

Ronnie should politely explain to Ms. Santos that accepting gifts from clients is prohibited
and inform her that she may be held liable if found guilty of giving gifts to government
employees. A simple "thank you" would suffice as a token of appreciation for his service.

As a public employee, Ronnie should be doing his job well because it his duty. He should
not expect anything in return from the client for his services. Integrity and adherence to the
law are more important than any unlawful financial gain.

1 of 12
 CASE # 5

BRING HOME OFFICE GODDIES

Which side would you take? Cynthia’s or Mely’s? Why?

As government employees, it is essential that we prioritize the public interest and uphold
the principles of accountability and transparency. This means using government resources
wisely and efficiently, ensuring that they are used for their intended purpose. It is our duty
to manage government resources in a responsible manner, and this includes properly
handling office supplies and equipment.

In the current situation, Mely and other office staff have made it a habit to take office
supplies and materials home for personal use, which is not only wasteful but also illegal.
Their head of office has condoned this behavior, setting a precedent for other employees
to follow. Cynthia opposes this practice, believing that it amounts to theft and that the
cumulative cost of these supplies can add up significantly.

I agree with Cynthia's stance. As government employees, we must maintain our integrity
and uphold the values of honesty and accountability. Taking office supplies home for
personal use is a breach of trust and a misuse of government resources. These supplies
were intended for official use, not personal gain. Even if the cost seems small, the
cumulative effect of such actions can lead to significant waste and misappropriation of
government funds.

Furthermore, taking government supplies can be seen as the beginning of a slippery slope
towards corruption. What may seem like a small infraction can eventually lead to more
serious forms of corruption. Employees who engage in such behavior may be held liable by
the government, as they have acted with dishonesty and lack of integrity. It is our
responsibility as government employees to uphold the public trust and ensure that our
actions align with our commitment to serving the public interest.

1 of 12
 CASE # 6

MORE THAN JUST CASINOS

What can you say about this?

Is something legal also automatically moral? What do you think?

Gambling, defined as betting on uncertain outcomes to win money or valuable items, has
been present in the Philippines for centuries.

The Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR), a government-owned

corporation, was established in response to the proliferation of illegal casinos. Its mandate
includes regulating and operating games of chance, generating revenue for social and
national development programs, and promoting tourism. While PAGCOR has implemented
various programs benefitting Filipino citizens, it's undeniable that its operations involve
gambling, which can have negative impacts on individuals and society.

Many people justify gambling as a harmless form of recreation, but it can lead to financial
losses and missed opportunities for more productive pursuits. The morality of gambling is
often tied to one's religious beliefs and values. While some view it as shameful to obtain
wealth without hard work, others see it as a form of entertainment.

Something legal is not automatically moral.

Although the creation of PAGCOR is legal as it is allowed by Law, the consequences of

people addicted to gambling makes it immoral.

Addiction to gambling is harmful regardless of its legal status. It's essential for individuals
to exercise self-control and discipline to avoid succumbing to addiction.

In my opinion, regulating casino gambling through PAGCOR is beneficial as it generates

revenue and supports various programs for underprivileged citizens. However, the ill
effects of PAGCOR operation to the society makes it immoral. People may lack control
over their gambling habits, leading to addiction and destructive behavior. These negatively
impacts the morality of a society.

1 of 12
 CASE # 7

I CAN AFFORD ANYWAY

If you were this employee, would you agree with her opinion regarding the CSC’s dress
code?

The Philippine government's Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards Law (RA 6713)
mandates public officials and employees, as well as their families, to lead modest lives
that are commensurate with their positions and income. The law aims to maintain a sense
of modesty and propriety in the civil service, as the attire worn by government officials and
employees reflects not only on themselves but also on the institution they represent. The
Civil Service Commission has further solidified this principle through Memorandum
Circular No. 14, series of 1991, which prohibits excessive use of costume jewelry and
flashy accessories.

Modesty is defined as a quality that involves being humble and respectful, not just in one's
speech and conduct but also in one's dress. In the context of dressing, modesty involves
adhering to guidelines that ensure one's attire is decent, gender-appropriate, and
respectful to others. This is not about suppressing personal style but about demonstrating
professionalism and respect for the institution.

In the case at hand, an employee was found to be wearing extravagant jewelry every day at
work, violating the guidelines set forth in MC No.14. She also claims that the CSC does not
have the right to tell people what to wear.

I do not agree with the opinion of the employee considering that there are existing
regulations about the Dress Code of government employees. While an individual may be
able to afford luxuries, there is a distinction between personal and professional settings.
When working, employees are expected to dress appropriately and adhere to office attire
guidelines to maintain a sense of modesty and proper decorum in the civil service. Failure
to comply with these rules may result in disciplinary action under existing Civil Service
laws and regulations.

1 of 12
 CASE # 8

GIFTS GALORE

Who do you think between Adora and Josie is right? Why?

Republic Act No. 6713, also known as the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for
Public Officials and Employees, explicitly prohibits public officials and employees from
receiving gifts from individuals other than family members or relatives, even if the gift is
given on special occasions. The act considers any gift of value, regardless of whether it's
given as a token of appreciation or in exchange for a favor, as a violation of the code.

In this case, Adora, a PNP employee responsible for processing appointments, has
developed a habit of accepting gifts from clients as tokens of appreciation for her services.
Her colleagues have advised her to stop receiving these gifts, citing the possibility of
violating RA 6713. Adora argues that the gifts are of nominal value and that clients might
take offense if she refuses them.

Josie's reminder to Adora about the potential consequences of receiving gifts is an act of
good will and a reminder of their duty to uphold integrity and honesty in their work. As
public employees, it is their responsibility to know what is right and wrong and to prevent
potential embarrassment and penalties.

In this particular case, I think that the position of Josie is right

Although government employees are allowed to accept gifts of nominal value, there is no
clear definition what it means or the amount of the gift one can accept is not specified.
However, there is no clear definition of what constitutes nominal value, making it
subjective and open to interpretation. To be on the safe side, it's best to refuse the gift.
Communicating with clients about their generosity can help them understand that their
appreciation is enough and that gifts are not necessary.

1 of 12
 CASE # 9

FOR OFFICIAL USE ALSO

If you happen to chance upon a government service vehicle parked in places where you
least expect a government official may transact business with, what will you do? Will you
take time to report the incident to the Ombudsman? If not, what will you do? Why?

There are strict laws and regulations that prohibit public officials and employees from
using government-issued vehicles for personal purposes. Violators can face severe
consequences, including liability under Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt
Practices Act), RA 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and
Employees), and other relevant laws.

According to the Commission on Audit (COA), government vehicles should only be used for
official business purposes, and all trips must be authorized by a trip ticket. The ticket
should specify the destination, purpose, and duration of the travel, and be displayed in a
conspicuous place on the vehicle. The trip ticket should also include the name of the
passenger(s) using the service vehicle.

Government-issued vehicles are intended for official business travels that align with the
agency's mandate, vision, and mission. Examples of authorized uses include site visits,
attending meetings, making presentations to clients, entertaining customers, or delivering
or servicing products. Any unauthorized use of government vehicles may be grounds for
investigation by the Ombudsman.

The Ombudsman is responsible for investigating and prosecuting Philippine government

officials accused of crimes, particularly graft and corruption. It has the authority to
investigate any act or omission by a public officer or employee that appears to be illegal,
unjust, improper, or inefficient.

If I encounter a government service vehicle parked in an unusual location, I can check the
trip ticket to verify its destination and purpose. If there is a discrepancy between the actual
trip and the trip ticket, I should report it to the Ombudsman. Remember that even small
personal uses of government vehicles can add up and waste valuable resources. Using
government-issued vehicles for personal purposes is strictly prohibited and can lead to
legal consequences.

1 of 12
 CASE # 10

HE DOES, I DO

What do you think? Who is right, Roy or his boss?

The Philippine Constitution emphasizes the importance of accountability, integrity, loyalty,

and efficiency among public officials and employees. As such, it is essential for them to
uphold the highest ethical standards and be responsible for their actions at all times.

The Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V of Executive Order No. 292 mandates that each
head of department or agency require a daily record of attendance from all officers and
employees, including those working in the field or on water. Additionally, public employees
and officials are required to render not less than eight hours of work a day, five days a
week, with specific hours from 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.,
excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays.

Roy, a rank-and-file employee, often arrives late to work and receives notices for his
tardiness. He feels unfairly targeted because his boss, Mr. Sanchez, is also late but gets
away with it. However, Roy should not compare himself to his boss, as department heads
often report to the office on Saturdays and even render overtime without pay.

Roy's excuses for being late are not justified, and he should consider finding alternative
solutions such as renting a place near his workplace or adjusting his schedule to avoid
traffic. Mr. Sanchez, on the other hand, should communicate with Roy in a more
professional manner and set a good example by following the rules.

Both Roy and his supervisor are wrong. Roy must do something to address the causes of
his tardiness and not look for escape goat for his infractions. The supervisor on the other
hand must be responsible enough to follow the rules and set a good example to his
subordinates. Rather than justifying one mistakes by pointing out the flaws of others, one
should take responsibility and make amends. Conflicts within an organization can be
resolved by talking things out, listening to both sides, and dealing with them quickly and
fairly.

It is essential for leaders to acknowledge their mistakes and continue to learn from their
colleagues. By doing so, we can maintain a positive work environment and uphold the
highest standards of public service.

1 of 12