Courtesy resignation violates security tenure (3)

The Department of the Interior and Local Government and Philippine National Police reported that out of the 953 police colonies and generals asked to submit their courtesy resignation to cleanse the organization of nine PNP officers found involved in illegal drug trafficking, 941 have submitted their letters of resignation while 23 have not complied with the directive, euphemistically called “appeal” by the DILG head.

The call for courtesy resignation designated as an “appeal” is such a stretch and offends the legal mind. No matter how deodorizing cover you enclose the courtesy resignation, its coercive nature cannot be extinguished, for it is still a subtle violation of the right of the PNP officers to the security of tenure.

Have the nine targeted rogue cops submitted their courtesy resignation? For many days the PNP and the DILG refused to answer that and tried vainly to evade the issue. The other day the PNP, thru its spokesperson, finally publicly admitted that those suspected of involvement in illegal drugs remain in their posts, which is an implied admission that either they have not submitted their courtesy resignations or if they have submitted them, the same have not been accepted.

In either case, the very purpose of asking the PNP officers to resign has not been achieved. If as they say they are certain of their drug-related criminal activities, why let them remain in their posts? They should be booted pronto! Why go through the rigmarole of evaluating, assessing, and inquiring into their illegal participation when they already know that, which is precisely why they asked them to resign? By

“By targeting a few with that poorly thought, unproductive and foolish idea, they dragged the entire top PNP echelons, demoralizing them and creating resentment against the present administration.

targeting a few with that poorly thought, unproductive and foolish idea, they dragged the entire top PNP echelons, demoralizing them and creating resentment against the present administration.

Worse, the DILG Secretary was quoted as saying that those narco cops will be allowed to retire instead of accepting their resignation. What kind of doltish hogwash policy is that?! These police scalawags, after committing drug-related crimes, destroying families who have become dysfunctional owing to one of their members being addicted to drugs, and enriching themselves from the fruits of their crimes, will be rewarded with retirement and other fringe benefits, instead of dismissing them?

In an attempt to rectify the foolish mistake, the DILG head said that the retiring rogue cops will be criminally prosecuted. In other words, they will still be allowed to retire and get their retirement benefits. It’s the same lousy banana! Rewarding them with a retirement bonanza is outrageous, vexatious, and even criminal, for that would make the rewarding authority guilty of dereliction of duty.

The guilty ones are not entitled to retirement benefits. They should be fully prosecuted vigorously and to the fullest extent of the law, and after conviction, clamped to jail for the rest of their remaining lives.

What is this creation of a five-member committee outside

“The call for courtesy resignation is designated as an ‘appeal’ is such a stretch, it does not extinguish its coercive nature.

of the PNP that will motu propio evaluate and assess those PNP officers who submitted their courtesy resignation, and decide arbitrarily who will remain in their positions?

To this writer, such creation of that commission or committee is irregularly supplanting the regular administrative machinery outlined by law to impose sanctions on the errant police officers, either with a reprimand, suspension, or dismissal.

The law gives them the right to be heard on any complaint of misconduct, misdemeanor, or irregularity. They are entitled to due process. It appears that the said body will judge them based on whatever record is shown to the members or information relative to the police officers’ performance and conduct as law enforcers.

There appears to be no opportunity for them to dispute unsavory reports about them or derogatory information submitted before it. They will be judged according to the committee’s evaluation and assessment based on whatever document or evidence is submitted to the probe body, without the officers given the opportunity of a rebuttal in their defense.

Not only is that procedure repulsive, but it is also repugnant to the Constitution and the laws of the land.

The police officers who will be subjected to this irregular and unlawful procedure must assert their constitutional rights. As law enforcers, they should be unafraid to protect their rights, for otherwise, how can they protect the rights of others if they cannot even protect themselves from that unlawful intrusion?