BY GILBERT P. BAYORAN
The National Police Commission has ordered the Philippine National Police to implement its dismissal order issued against a police chief and five others who were formerly assigned at the Moises Padilla Police Station in Negros Occidental.
Napolcom Commissioner Chito Bustonera, in his issued order to PMaj. Gen. Hermenio Tadeo, Jr, chief of the PNP Directorate for Personnel and Records Management, said that the Commission finds respondents PCapt. Allan Javelosa Reloj, PMSgt. Ricardo Campos Digcong, Jr., PCorporals Nobel Lodrico Perante and Felix Corejado Pesales Jr., Patrolman Michael Eboseo Mondido and Pat. Darry Ducay Dormido, culpable for grave misconduct and grave irregularities in the performance of duty, with a maximum penalty of dismissal from the police service, in view of the presence of the aggravating circumstance of being found guilty of two or more charges, or counts.
The complaints against Reloj, former police chief of Moises Padilla, and five other town police personnel, were filed against them by Felix Mathias Segundo Feria Yulo, husband of incumbent Moises Padilla Mayor Ella Celestina Garcia-Yulo.
“Accordingly, the accessory penalties of cancellation of their police eligibilities, forfeiture of retirement benefits, except accrued leave credits, and perpetual disqualification from holding public office are likewise imposed,” the order added.
The dismissal of the six policemen stemmed from the complaints filed by Yulo, then the vice mayor of Moises Padilla, and her husband, Felix Mathias Segundo Feria Yulo III, who accused them of conducting an illegal checkpoint, performing an unlawful arrest, and illegal search and seizure on their vehicle on December 19, 2017, along Brgy. Crossing Magallon, Moises Padilla.
In its Oct. 21, 2020 decision, the Napolcom said “it was established, based on records, that the area where the checkpoint was placed, was not well-lighted, and that no signage bearing the name of the PNP unit, and the participating organizations were visibly displayed.”
“The search performed by respondents upon complainants was unlawful because, aside from the POP (Police Operational Procedure) violations they committed, the former failed to prove that the area where the checkpoint was placed was within their immediate control,” the Napolcom order said.
“The items seized from the vehicle of the complainants are inadmissible as evidence because they were products of an illegal, warrantless search and seizure, otherwise known as the exclusionary rule, or the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine,” it added.
The testimonies of the complainants and their witnesses were clear and straightforward, narrating in detail the act done by respondents, thus accorded greater weight as opposed to the defense of alibi and denial of respondents, the Napolcom said.
From the foregoing facts and pieces of evidence presented, the Commission rules that the prosecution was able to prove, by substantial evidence, the culpability of the respondents, who all acted in conspiracy in conducting the illegal/improper checkpoint upon the complainants’ vehicle and the seizure of their properties, the Napolcom order said.
The Napolcom has required the PNP to inform them if the order was already implemented.*