In the Court of Appeals’ decision on the petition filed by Governor Joseph Cua regarding the 2019 Ombudsman decision finding him guilty of gross neglect of duty and suspending him for one year without pay, there is a lesson that all civil servants must learn and never forget until they retire.
It defined Simple Neglect of Duty as the failure of an employee or official to give proper attention to a task expected of him or her, signifying a disregard of a duty resulting from carelessness or indifference.
Among the instances of Simple Neglect of Duty cited by the Supreme Court in Field Investigation Office v. Cruz are the following:
“A short survey of cases decided by the Court where the respondent therein was held guilty of simple neglect of duty shows a common thread. In Philippine Retirement Authority v. Rupa, it considers the following as simple neglect of duty at that time: delay in the transmittal of court records, delay in responding to written queries, and delay of more than one (1) year and seven (7) months in furnishing a party with a copy of the court’s decision. Thus, mere delay in the performance of one’s function was deemed as simple
neglect of duty.
In Daplas v. Department of Finance, et al., failure to declare some properties in the Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth without the intent to make a false statement, as required by R.A. No. 6713, was considered as within the ambit of simple neglect of duty.
In Ombudsman v. Tongson, et al., the public officers failed to use reasonable diligence in the performance of their officially-designated duties as they failed to comply with the Implementing Rules and Regulations of Presidential Decree No. 1594. The public officers involved were held guilty of simple neglect of duty and were mandated to comply with the said law.
In Deputy Ombudsman for the Military and Other Law Enforcement Offices v. Saligumba, the public officer neglected to efficiently and effectively discharge his duties to inspect deliveries of procurement, contrary to the Philippine National Police Procurement Manual, series of 1997.
In Facura and Tuason v. Court of Appeals, et al., the Human Resources Management Officer was found guilty of simple neglect of duty because in her listed duties under the Civil Service Commission Accreditation Program, she should have been aware of the reportorial requirements for appointments.
In Salumbides and Arana v. Ombudsman, et al., the Court stated that the public officers fell short of the reasonable diligence because they failed to ascertain the legal requirements and fiscal soundness of the projects before approving the same, especially without competitive bidding. Thus, respondents in that case failed to disburse funds in compliance with the requirements of the law.
Finally, in Galero v. Court of Appeals, et al., the immediate supervisor was penalized for simple neglect of duty when he failed to monitor his employees’ attendance and their daily time record, which led to one employee dividing his time between two (2) employers and being paid twice.”
Under Section 46, Rule 10 of the Revised Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service (RACCS), the penalty for Simple Neglect of Duty is suspension of one (1) month and one (1) day suspension to six (6) months for the first offense and dismissal from the service for the second offense.
The punishment is light but the black mark it leaves on one’s record as a civil servant will stay even after one’s retirement.
Every day, many government employees commit this offense against the people they have sworn to serve to the best of their ability and even beyond office hours.
From delaying to act on a request to failing to reply to a query within 15 days, the civil servant exposes himself or herself to the possibility of an administrative case that would cost them time, money and effort, aside from the unnecessary stress.
While the case against Gov. Cua five years ago certainly reeked of political motives, any complaint, anonymous or otherwise, filed against an ordinary civil servant would certainly be acted upon with dispatch by the CSC or the Ombudsman.
It would be better for every civil servant to make sure that by serving the people, he earns every cent of his monthly wage.
As one American pastor and writer said, the measure of true greatness is to serve unnoticed and work unseen.