THE Court of Appeals has denied the petition of retired Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) commandant Admiral Wilfredo Tamayo appealing the ruling of the Sandiganbayan which found him administratively liable despite his acquittal in the graft case involving the payment of P9.59 million to a supplier despite allegedly incomplete deliveries.
In a 5-page resolution promulgated on April 13, 2023, the appellate court’s former Second Division held that Tamayo’s motion for reconsideration was “devoid of merit.”
“A finding of guilt in a criminal case will not necessarily result in a finding of liability in the administrative case. Conversely, petitioner’s acquittal does not necessarily exculpate him administratively,” said the resolution penned by Associate Justice Maria Elisa Sempio Diy and concurred by Associate Justices Fernanda Lampas Peralta and Carlito Calpatura.
“Wherefore, premises considered, the motion for reconsideration of the decision dated September 28, 2021 filed by petitioner Wilfredo Tamayo (Ret.) is hereby denied. The decision dated September 28, 2021 thereby stands,” the ruling added.
Tamayo anchored his motion on the Sandiganbayan’s September 17, 2021 decision dismissing the criminal charges against him in connection with his alleged approval of a disbursement voucher for the full payment of P9.59 million for the Special Maritime Advance Rescue Team items of the PCG despite supplier Joshwell Trading having only made partial deliveries.
The anti-graft court said the report made no mention of any undelivered equipment to the PCG, meaning all the items were inspected and found to be in order.
With this, Tamayo argued that he is entitled to an exoneration of the administrative finding of guilt since he had been acquitted by the anti-graft court after trial on the merits.
Among the administrative cases lodged against Tamayo were misconduct, gross neglect of duty, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.
The Ombudsman’s Field Investigation Office, through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), asked the appellate court to sustain the guilty finding by the anti-graft court against Tamayo on the administrative case.
The OSG pointed out that administrative cases require a less stringent burden of evidence compared to the criminal cases, hence the need for the CA to sustain the anti-graft court’s ruling.
The CA agreed with the OSG and said Tamayo merely reiterated the issues previously raised and have already been thoroughly determined and evaluated in the assailed decision.
“Verily, the Court finds no cogent reason to recalibrate and reevaluate the evidence.
Corollary, for lack of substantial and legal justification, the Court has no compelling reason to reverse and or modify the decision,” the CA held.
