The Office of the Ombudsman preventively suspended an administrative aide for unexplained wealth. In an Order issued by the Office of the Ombudsman, Ester Grafil Sese, a Bureau of Customs Administrative Aide IV, was placed under preventive suspension until the cases the Department of Finance-Revenue Integrity Protection Service (DOF-RIPS) filed against her are terminated or for a period not to exceed six (6) months.
Comparison of public records and respondent’s Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN) showed that Sese may have acquired wealth disproportionate to her lawful income; she may have failed to declare all her family’s motor vehicles, her husband’s firearms, and her husband’s business interest in her 2008 to 2012 SALNs; and she may have made false and inconsistent declarations in her SALNs.
In 2004, respondent registered a P72,355.50 annual gross income, while her husband’s income was only P93,600.00, but she spent a total of P802,018.80 for the year, broken down as amortization for her townhouse, payments for her Isuzu Elf Van, Honda Wave, and her son’s tuition fee. In 2005, with an increased of only P5,908.50 in her 2004 annual gross salary, she again spent P335,578.80 for the whole year amortization of her townhouse; P32,160.00 for her Honda Wave; and P60,000.00 for her son and daughter’s tuition fees.
For year 2006, respondent had the same annual gross income as 2005, but she spent P335,578.80 as whole year amortization for her townhouse; she also paid P32,160.00 for her Honda Wave; and P60,000.00 for her son and daughter’s tuition fees for year 2006. In 2007, respondent and her husband earned a total of P114,330.98 annual gross income, but she spent a total of P158,684.90. In 2008, she earned P92,634.00, but she spent P450,000.00.The Sese couple also earned an aggregate amount of P1,355,210.39 for the years 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012. However, on those same years, she spent a total of P3,267,818.39.
Aside from the above alleged unexplained wealth, Sese apparently failed to declare in her 2002 to 2012 SALNs a lot she acquired in February 11, 2002; and a number of motor vehicles. Likewise, she did not report in her 2012 SALN, her husband’s firearms and business and she also made inconsistent declarations in her SALNs.
Considering the above, the Anti-Graft Body found it warranted to preventively suspend Sese, who now faces investigation for allegedly violating R.A. Nos. 3019 and 6713; Articles 171 and 183 of the Revised Penal Code, Grave Misconduct and Serious Dishonesty, and Forfeiture. Under Section 24 of RA 6770, “the Ombudsman or his Deputy may preventively suspend any officer or employee under his authority pending an investigation, if in his judgment the evidence of guilt is strong, and (a) the charge against such officer or employee involves dishonesty, oppression or grave misconduct or neglect in the performance of duty; (b) the charges would warrant removal from the service; or (c) the respondent’s continued stay in office may prejudice the case filed against him.”
Notwithstanding the preventive suspension, the Ombudsman emphasized that respondent’s preventive suspension is merely a preliminary step in an investigation and is not in any way a final determination of her guilt. The suspension is only to prevent an official from using his/her office to intimidate or influence witnesses or to tamper with records that might be vital to the prosecution of the case against him/her.
