Danao City engineer cleared from raps

CEBU, Philippines — For lack of substantial evidence, the Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas has dismissed the administrative complaint filed against an employee of the City Engineering Office of Danao City, Cebu.

Engineer III Cora Dutosme Monisit was sued for Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service for her alleged failure to perform her obligations.

Monisit allegedly used her office in making representations that she can facilitate transactions which pass through her office without proper documentation.

"The allegation that respondent agreed to facilitate the purchase and delivery of a total of 31 truckloads of limestone gravel, and help spouses Eyerman in securing the necessary permits in building a piggery, is not substantiated," read the decision.

The case stemmed from the complaint filed by spouses Ma. Lenie and John Dominick Eyerman.

Sometime in October 2013, the couple allegedly went to the motor pool office of the city government of Danao to purchase limestone gravel to be delivered at their property in Manlayag, Patag, Danao.

The couple alleged they transacted with and made payments to Monisit for the specific arrangement that she would facilitate the purchase and delivery of 31 truckloads of limestone gravel at P500 per truckload and help them in securing the necessary permits in building a piggery in their property.

However, the couple alleged only five truckloads were delivered.

In addition, the P27,000 they gave to Monisit, only P2,000 was used to secure a permit.

Monisit, in her counter-affidavit, confirmed that the couple came to her office and sought for the delivery of 10 truckloads of limestone.

A month later, the couple again went to her office and sought for the immediate delivery of another 21 truckloads of limestone but denied their request because of several other pending orders.

Monisit denied that she demanded sum of money from the couple.

Moreover, she was surprised when the couple came to the City General Services Office in November 2015 ranting and looking for their business permit, building permit and other matters which she had no knowledge nor participation.

Graft investigation and prosecution officer III Maria Bernadeth Andal-Subaan ruled in favor of Monisit because the couple failed to present substantial proof that would support their allegation.

"In fine, the complaint is replete with pure allegations, unsupported by even the documentary evidence attached to it. These allegations, alone, would not warrant a finding of administrative liability against respondent," read the decision. (FREEMAN)