Railroading due process
Amid the worsening drug problem, it seems that DILG Secretary Benhur Abalos has found a Solomonic solution, and that is, courtesy resignation.
The good secretary said that courtesy resignation of PNP’s top brasses is part of the campaign to cleanse their ranks of the “deep infection” of the illegal drug trade. From the way the drug problem is portrayed in this proposal, it would appear that the country is now like a person having a sepsis leading to the failure of his vital organs.
Like a wonder drug, courtesy resignation is proposed as a shortcut to the “lengthy” judicial process. Abalos admitted that it is a very radical approach to the problem. Impliedly, he is portraying that the judiciary unnecessarily burdens the government’s war against drugs due to its alleged circuitous and lengthy process in the removal of PNP’s high ranking officials. Though he appeared to be determined in pursuing his courtesy resignation plan, Abalos did not cite specific cases where the courts become the hindrance in the cleansing of the scalawags in uniform.
The judiciary has its own shortcomings. The members of the bench and bar do not pretend that there is none. However, it is unfair for the entire judicial system to be used as a justification for railroading due process.
The Civil Service Commission in CSC Resolution No. 011782 s. 2001 said that ‘courtesy resignation’ cannot properly be interpreted as resignation in the legal sense for it is not necessarily a reflection of an employee’s intention to surrender his(her) position. The existence of force, coercion, duress, or undue influence shall give rise to the presumption that a ‘courtesy resignation’ has transpired. An official order or directive requiring the tender of ‘courtesy resignation’ shall be null and void on its face, creating neither right nor obligation.
The Chief PNP has the summary dismissal authority for all members of the PNP while the PNP Regional Directors are the summary dismissal authorities in their respective jurisdictions. The rules governing summary dismissal proceedings are supposed to be summary in nature and cases should not gather dusts in the docket room if these are followed to the letter. Decisions in these cases are immediately executory.
While the removed police officers may seek judicial recourse, appellate courts may enjoin the execution of the decision only when there is a pressing necessity to avoid injurious consequences that cannot be redressed under any standard of compensation.
The existence of the foregoing administrative proceedings means that the PNP organization itself has its own speedy mechanism to cleanse its ranks. Rather than blaming other branches of government for its failure, it is right time for the PNP and its attached agencies to revisit how these legal tools can be effectively utilized for “cleansing.” The current proposal described as a shortcut to the judicial process raises grave concerns, not just for potential violations of due process, but also for a non-transparent out-of-the box process. And here is the catch: “Should President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. accept the courtesy resignation of some senior police officials, this will automatically be considered as their retirement” and would mean they will receive benefits.
A public officer or employee who is removed or dismissed from office is not entitled to retirement benefits. As publicly discussed in media interviews, the acceptance of courtesy resignation implies that the police official is involved in illegal drugs, thus, must be dismissed from service without benefits. But when this official tender courtesy resignation, he will be given a graceful exit and “pabaon” for helping the PNP get rid of its problems. Solomonic, indeed.