Ombudsman suspends Davao Sur postman

Subscribe Now August 08, 2011 at 11:30am

THE Office of the Ombudsman in Mindanao suspended an employee of a post office in Sta. Maria, Davao del Sur for malversing more than P50,000 of his cash collection. In a decision dated July 22, Graft Investigation and Prosecution Officer Vivian A. Agdeppa-Jumilla meted the penalty of three months suspension without pay on Herman Malbino, postman of Sta. Maria Post Office.

Malbino was found to have malversed the amount of P51,361.35 from his cash collection as sworn to by Nimia Acebes, regional director of the Philippine Postal Corporation (PPC) 11. The amount was found missing by an audit of the cash and accounts made by Carlito V. Tapic, postal district manager of Davao del Sur.

Acebes said a demand letter was served on Malbino on May 21, 2009, which required him to produce the missing funds and to submit a written explanation. He failed to explain the missing amount.

In his counter-affidavit, Malbino denied the allegations and contended that he was designated only as the acting postmaster due to lack of personnel at the PPC.

Malbino said he declined to accept the post as acting postmaster, but he was told that it was only temporary.

He explained he was not qualified as postmaster and that he does not know how to balance the accounts, but he tried to learn anyway.

Malbino also claimed that the vault where the cash collections were kept was defective.

He said he reported this to his superior officer in Digos City but was only told that the safe will be fixed or replaced although this was never done.

He said he cannot explain how the cash shortage happened, but when he was told to produce the amount, he tried to borrow money to pay for it, but no one could lend him.

But Jumilla ruled that Malbino's defense that he has no knowledge in recording and balancing of accounts appears to be a lame excuse, since he himself said he tried to learn the job assigned to him.

She also said the excuse that the safe was defective is not valid and that he should not have used it.

"In the absence of a valid explanation to justify the said shortage, the arguments and defenses raised by him cannot be given full credit so as to exonerate him from any liability. As such, this Office finds the respondent liable for Misconduct," Jumilla ruled.


« Police raid cybersex den in Davao City Davao farmer finds health market niche »