SC affirms dismissal of ex-DFA employee for bigamy

The Supreme Court has affirmed the dismissal from service of a former employee of the Department of Foreign Affairs after she was found guilty of a crime involving moral turpitude.

In a 10-page decision promulgated on June 15, the High Court affirmed the 2018 resolution of the Court of Appeals and denied the petition for review filed by Rosa Gonzalbo-Macatangay.

“The petition is not meritorious. The Court affirms the CA ruling; the imposition of the penalty of dismissal from service is proper,” the Court said.

According to the SC, Macatangay did not contest that she is guilty of the administrative offense of conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude and that bigamy involves moral turpitude.

Citing the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service, the Court said that conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude is punishable with dismissal from service.

In 2014, the Civil Service Commission-National Capital Region found Macatangay guilty of the administrative offense and meted the penalty of dismissal from service, along with imposable accessory penalties.

This was after a complaint was filed before the CSC alleging that Modesto Macatangay Jr. married the petitioner in February 1997 while married to another.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling of the CSC in August 2017.

However, Macatangay argued that the CA erred in not considering the mitigating circumstances in her case.

For the Supreme Court, mitigating circumstances such as length of service, first commission, and outstanding performance, cannot be applied.

“The Court rules in the negative. The CA is correct in not appreciating the mitigating circumstances petitioner invokes. The facts of the instant case do not justify the mitigation of the prescribed penalty,” it said.

The High Court stressed that bigamy cannot be taken lightly.

“Bigamy cannot be taken lightly as its commission reflects the person's character. It involves moral turpitude as settled in jurisprudence,” it said.

“Petitioner flagrantly disregarded the law in marrying Modesto despite her knowledge of his prior and existing marriage; as the appellate court aptly observed, this ‘shows her moral depravity and cast[s] serious doubt on her fitness and integrity to continue in the public service’,” it added.—AOL, GMA News