Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to www.scribd.com

Scribd
Upload
137 views1 page

Submit Digest

1) Karen Silverio-Buffe was appointed as a prosecutor in Romblon province but the provincial prosecutor's office did not receive notice of her appointment. 2) Secretary of Justice Raul Gonzalez then ordered Silverio-Buffe to cease acting as a prosecutor as she had no valid appointment. 3) Silverio-Buffe and her husband filed a complaint alleging Congressman Eleandro Madrona influenced Gonzalez and Undersecretary Fidel Exconde to refuse to administer her oath and withhold her appointment papers due to a personal dispute. 4) The court ruled the case should be handled by the Office of the Ombudsman, not the IBP, as it involves the official

Uploaded by

Sumpt Latog
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
137 views1 page

Submit Digest

1) Karen Silverio-Buffe was appointed as a prosecutor in Romblon province but the provincial prosecutor's office did not receive notice of her appointment. 2) Secretary of Justice Raul Gonzalez then ordered Silverio-Buffe to cease acting as a prosecutor as she had no valid appointment. 3) Silverio-Buffe and her husband filed a complaint alleging Congressman Eleandro Madrona influenced Gonzalez and Undersecretary Fidel Exconde to refuse to administer her oath and withhold her appointment papers due to a personal dispute. 4) The court ruled the case should be handled by the Office of the Ombudsman, not the IBP, as it involves the official

Uploaded by

Sumpt Latog
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Xandredg Sumpt L.

Latog – 1 Sanchez Roman

[ A.C. No. 8186, October 12, 2016 ]

SPOUSES EDWIN B. BUFFE AND KAREN M. SILVERIO-BUFFE, COMPLAINANTS, VS. SEC. RAUL
M. GONZALEZ, USEC. FIDEL J. EXCONDE, JR., AND CONGRESSMAN ELEANDRO JESUS F.
MADRONA, RESPONDENTS.

TOPIC: DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS IN PUBLIC SERVICE

FACTS: On 15 July 2008, former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo appointed Karen M. Silverio-Buffe (Silverio-
Buffe) as Prosecutor I/Assistant Provincial Prosecutor of Romblon province. On 19 August 2008, Silverio-Buffe
informed the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor of Romblon that she was officially reporting for work beginning
that day. In a letter dated 26 August 2008, Romblon Provincial Prosecutor Arsenio R.M. Almadin asked former
Secretary of Justice Raul M. Gonzalez (Gonzalez) to confirm the appointment of Silverio-Buffe since the Provincial
Prosecution Office did not receive any official communication regarding Silverio-Buffe's appointment.

In a Memorandum Order dated 19 December 2008, Gonzalez ordered Silverio-Buffe "to cease and desist from
acting as prosecutor in the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor of Romblon, or in any Prosecutor's Office for that
matter, considering that [she has] no appointment to act as such, otherwise [she] will be charged of usurpation of
public office.”

On 11 February 2009, Silverio-Buffe, together with her husband Edwin B. Buffe, filed with the Office of the Bar
Confidant (OBC) a Joint Complaint-Affidavit alleging that former Congressman Eleandro Jesus F. Madrona
(Madrona), acting out of spite or revenge, persuaded and influenced Gonzalez and Undersecretary Fidel J. Exconde,
Jr. (Exconde) into refusing to administer Silverio-Buffe's oath of office and into withholding the transmittal of her
appointment papers to the DOJ Regional Office. Madrona allegedly acted out of spite or revenge against Silverio-
Buffe because she was one of the plaintiffs in a civil case for enforcement of a Radio Broadcast Contract, which was
cancelled by the radio station due to adverse commentaries against Madrona and his allies in Romblon.

Madrona denied that he acted out of spite or revenge against Silverio-Buffe or that he persuaded, induced, or
influenced anyone to refuse to administer oath to Silverio-Buffe and to withhold the transmittal of her appointment
papers.

ISSUE: Whether Gonzalez, Exconde, and Madrona should be administratively disciplined based on the allegations
in the complaint.

RULING: NO. The present administrative case should be resolved by the Office of the Ombudsman, considering
that complainants have filed a complaint before it on 12 February 2009.  The authority of the Ombudsman to act on
complainants' administrative complaint is anchored on Section 13(1), Article XI of the 1987 Constitution.
Considering that both Exconde and Madrona are public officers being charged for actions, which are allegedly
unfair and discriminatory, involving their official functions during their tenure, the present case should be resolved
by the Office of the Ombudsman as the appropriate government agency. Indeed, the IBP has no jurisdiction over
government lawyers who are charged with administrative offenses involving their official duties. For such acts,
government lawyers fall under the disciplinary authority of either their superior or the Ombudsman. Moreover, an
anomalous situation will arise if the IBP asserts jurisdiction and decides against a government lawyer, while the
disciplinary authority finds in favor of the government lawyer.

You might also like