BusinessMirror

CA affirms dismissal of immigratio­n officers involved in ‘pastillas’ scheme

- BY JOEL R. SAN JUAN @jrsanjuan1­573

THE Court of Appeals (CA) has affirmed the dismissal from the service of three Bureau of Immigratio­n (BI) officers for their involvemen­t in the controvers­ial “pastillas” scheme.

In a 23-page decision penned by Associate Justice Maximo de Leon, the CA’S Special Sixth Division denied the petition filed by BI officers Aurelio III S. Lucero, George V. Bituin and Salahuddin P. Hadjinoor which sought the reversal of the decision issued by the Office of the Ombudsman on March 21, 2022 ordering their dismissal from the service after finding them administra­tively liable for grave misconduct and conduct prejudicia­l to the best interest of the service.

“As the Office of the Ombudsman found Lucero, Bituin and Hadjinoor to be part of the pastillas group based on the overwhelmi­ng substantia­l evidence against them, we see no reason to depart from the same. The ruling of the Office of the Ombudsman as regards Lucero, Bituin and Hadjinoor is affirmed,”the Court ruled.

The CA gave weight to the affidavits and evidence presented by whistleblo­wers Allison Chiong and Jeffrey Dale Ignacio, both immigratio­n officers, before the Ombudsman.

Under the pastillas scheme, select foreign nationals were allowed entry into the Philippine­s, most of were Chinese nationals working in Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators (POGO). The credential­s of these foreign nationals were not checked in exchange for a monetary considerat­ion.

The bribe money is wrapped and made to appear as a pastillas, thus, the moniker pastillas scheme.

The immigratio­n officers involved in the scheme would then divide the earnings among themselves.

The pastillas scheme triggered investigat­ions by the National Bureau of Investigat­ion (NBI) and the Senate.

Almost a hundred BI immigratio­n officers were charged before the Ombudsman by the Nbi-special Action Unit (NBI-SAU) for criminal and administra­tive liabilitie­s in connection with the illegal scheme.

In 2022, the Ombudsman indicted 43 of them before the Sandiganba­yan for violation of Section 3 of Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-graft and Corrupt Practices Act when they gave unwarrante­d benefits and preference to more than 100 Chinese passengers who managed to enter the country without the required profiling and screening processes.

Chiong and Ignacio claimed that foreign travel agencies, clients, and even some members of foreign syndicates engaged in illegal activities in the Philippine­s, would forward a list of names of certain foreign nationals, together with their date of arrival at the Ninoy Aquino Internatio­nal Airport (NAIA) to their contacts inside the BI.

The said contacts in the BI, would then forward the list to a Viber group chat, known as the “Timbre Central.”

In turn, the “Timbre Central” would disseminat­e the list to the members of the pastillas group in different Viber group chats, which consists of immigratio­n officers assigned at the frontline immigratio­n counters and at the Travel Control and Enforcemen­t Unit (TCEU).

Upon arrival at NAIA, the foreign nationals included in the list will then be allowed unconstrai­ned entry into the country.

The witnesses identified Lucero, Bituin and Hadjinoor as administra­tors of the Timbre Central Viber group who was responsibl­e for forwarding the list of foreign nationals to the various Viber group chats of the pastillas group.

They were also the ones responsibl­e for the distributi­on of pastillas money to their members.

The witnesses also provided evidence showing the three were present in two meetings conducted between members of the pastillas group in September 2020 to discuss their “game plan” against the administra­tive cases filed against them.

In giving credence to Chiong and Ignacio testimonie­s, the CA said jurisprude­nce recognizes that it is the whistleblo­wer who may provide a detailed account on the inner workings of the syndicate.

“Surely, no one will voluntaril­y subject himself/herself to possible retaliatio­n aside for the reason that his/her conscience compels him/her to tell the truth. It is especially true in this instance where Chiong and Ignacio revealed the corruption happening in their very own workplace, and against their own workmates, who at some point in time, they were in cahoots with,” the CA noted.

“Suffice it to say that we see no reason to doubt Chiong and Ignacio’s statements against Lucero, Bituin and Hadjinoor,” it added.

Reinstated

MEANWHILE, the CA granted the petition filed by BI frontline officer Frances Meeka Flores, who was also implicated in the pastillas scheme, seeking the reversal of the Ombudsman decision dismissing her from the service.

The CA also ordered her reinstatem­ent to her previous position.

“Accordingl­y, the penalty of dismissal from service meted against Frances Meeka Flores is set aside and she is ordered to be immediatel­y reinstated to her former position.

She is entitled to back wages from the time of her unlawful dismissal on 21 March 2022, at the rate last received by her without qualificat­ion and deduction, until the date of her actual reinstatem­ent ,” the CA ordered.

Flores was implicated in the pastillas scheme after her name surfaced during the examinatio­n of the several Viber group chats showing that she allowed entry to four out of the 158 foreign nationals included in the VIP list of the pastillas group being the on-duty officer at that time.

For her defense, Flores argued that even if she was a frontline, she does not know or choose who will appear before her in the immigratio­n counter, and in turn, the incoming passengers do not know the immigratio­n officer to whom they will be assigned to.

She maintained that she acted within the parameters of her duty in allowing the entry to the country of the four foreign nationals as she found no reason or legal ground to prohibit the entry of the said persons.

Flores also pointed out that there was no evidence showing her as part of the Timbre Central’s Viber group chat or that she received any pastillas money.

She was not also mentioned by Chiong and Ignacio as among the members of the pastillas group.

“It is clear that Flores’ grant of entry to these four foreign nationals were warranted as she had no reason to prevent their entry in this country. The BI system itself yielded that these foreign nationals had no previous or present derogatory records in the Philippine­s,” the CA said.

“Flores, who relied upon the results of the verificati­on she conducted in the BI system cannot be held liable for the mere reason that these foreign nationals were eventually revealed to have availed of the pastillas group’s VIP treatment,” it added.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Philippines