Police unit asks court to pursue case vs. officer

The Cebu City Internal Affairs Service and the Regional Crime Laboratory Office 7 wants the court to dismiss the petition filed by a policeman who sued to stop the police units from pursuing the administrative charges against him.

In their answer, the respondents argued that the civil suit filed by the policeman ought to be dismissed for lack of merit.

Regional Trial Court Judge James Stewart Himalaluan earlier denied the policeman’s application for a temporary restraining order against the police units.

Himalaluan found “no extreme urgency” in the policeman’s plea for issuance of a temporary restraining order against the police units since he is still active in the police service.

Also, the policeman has not been meted with any suspension yet, the judge pointed out.

Himalaluan also noted that the conduct of administrative investigation against the policeman has been held in abeyance.

In his petition, the policeman, who is detailed at the Regional Police Holding and Administrative Unit, said he took a drug test as one of the requirements for his application to the position of police officer 2 last July 25, 2017.

On July 29, 2017, the police’s crime lab issued a chemistry report stating that his urine showed traces of illegal drugs.

Surprised by the result, the policeman requested that a private laboratory conducts the drug test.

But he was told that a confirmatory test to contest the initial result could only be done in Manila.

Last Aug. 7, 2017, the petitioner said that SPO1 Pamela Garcia of the Cebu City Internal Affairs Service issued a notice of complaint against him for grave misconduct.

He argued that the respondents abused their discretion when they filed the grave misconduct complaint against him.

He asked the court to order the Cebu City Internal Affairs Service to declare the complaint null.

Replying to the charges, the Regional Crime Laboratory Office 7 denied it abused its discretion, saying it conducted the investigation against the policeman.

The petition is premature since the policeman has yet to exhaust administrative remedies prior to filing of the petition, the respondents said.

For its part, the Cebu City Internal Affairs Service argued that the policeman “does not have a clear and unmistakable right to be protected.”

“The mere filing of the administrative complaint against the petitioner did not cause him grave and irreparable injury,” the pleading read. /