SECURITY AND SHERIFF DIVISION, SANDIGANBAYAN, vs. RONALD ALLAN GOLE R.

CRUZ,
Security Guard I, Security and Sheriff Division. A.M. No. SB-17-24-P. 11 July 2017. EN BANC.

Parties:
Petitioner - SECURITY AND SHERIFF DIVISION, SANDIGANBAYAN
Respondent - RONALD ALLAN GOLE R. CRUZ

A security guard of the Sandiganbayan guilty of soliciting money from the counsel of a
party to a case pending before the said court must be held administratively liable even if there
are no direct evidence offered against him and only mere testimonies by witnesses because in
an administrative proceeding, the quantum of proof necessary for a finding of guilt is only
substantial evidence.

The SB received a report filed by SB security officers against Cruz. It alleged an incident of
solicitation of money where Cruz convinced a TV5 cameraman to hand over a while solicitation envelope to
Atty. David, the counsel for the accused Janet Lim Napoles in the PDAF case pending before SB. It appears
that several security personnel discovered that respondent had received the amount of P20,000 from Atty.
David inside a comfort room in the Sandiganbayan, just after a hearing for the case of Senator Jinggoy
Estrada and Ms. Napoles. Four other security guards, one of whom reported the incident, overheard the
conversation between Atty. David and a security guard asking if Cruz received the money.

The OCA recommended that Cruz be held administratively liable, be dismissed from the service
with forfeiture of all retirement benefits, except accrued leave credits, and with perpetual disqualification
from employment in any branch of the government. Should the recommendations of the OCA be adopted?

Yes. Cruz is guilty of improper solicitation. In an administrative proceeding, the quantum of proof
necessary for a finding of guilt is only substantial evidence, or such relevant evidence that a reasonable
mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. This requirement has been met in this case. Cruz’s
bare denial cannot prevail over the testimonies of 10 members of the Sandiganbayan security personne and
cameraman Gonzales, as these are testimonies that have withstood the scrutiny of the Sandiganbayan's
Investigating Officer and the OCA. Every employee of the court should be an exemplar of integrity,
uprightness, and honesty. A court personnel's act of soliciting or receiving money from litigants constitutes
grave misconduct. Under Section 46 (A) of Revised Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service, this is
punishable by dismissal from service even for the first offense.