Republic of the Philippines

PROVINCE OF NORTHERN SAMAR

Catarman
-o0o-

PROVINCIAL LEGAL OFFICE

TO: Hon. JOSE L. ONG, JR.

Governor

SUBJECT: Investigation Report Re: The Alleged Robbery at the

Provincial General Services Office (PGSO),
Provincial Government of Northern Samar, which
caused the loss of a government-issued DELL Laptop
of Administrative Aid 1, Gemma G. Go.

Date: 18 July 2018

This office received a report from the Civil Security Office (CSO) that an
alleged robbery took place on May 19 or 20, 2018 which caused the loss of the
government-issued laptop (DELL) of Administrative Aid I, Gemma G. Go, thus
prompting the conduct of this investigation.

The initial information that served as basis for this investigation was
provided by Gemma Go herself. Her written statement is attached hereto as
Annex A, and her sworn affidavit as Annex B. Two employees of the PGSO,
Leonila Dakay and Fernando Trongcoso also executed a Joint Affidavit attesting
to what they know of the incident, attached hereto as Annex C.

All potential witnesses have been interviewed and are listed as follows:

1. Mr. Raul Pelo (Plumber)

2. Mr. Edelwin Openiano (Administrative Aide I)
3. Mr. Henry Villa (Security Aide)
4. Mr. Ruel M. Dato (Security Guard I)
5. Engr. Jonathan Basierto (Electrical Engineer)
 6. Ms. Leonila Dakay (Administrative Aide I; retired on June 4, 2018)
7. Ms. Gemma G. Go (Administrative Aide I)
8. Mr. Cristolo Torres (Security Aide)
9. Mr. Fernando P. Trongcoso (Administrative Aide)
10.Mr. Joel Romero (Utility)

The objects that were reviewed are as follows:

1. Pictures of Gemma Go’s cubicle, table cabinets and drawers, as well as

other table drawers in the office, taken around 7:30 of May 21, 2018,
when the incident was discovered.

FINDINGS OF FACTS

On May 19, 2018, Friday, at around 2:00 o’clock in the afternoon, water
was dripping from the ceiling of PGSO, falling on Gemma Go’s desk, so she
had to stop working and kept her DELL laptop inside her office cabinet.

On May 20, 2018, Saturday, from around 9:00 to 11:00 in the morning,
Raul Pelo and Edelwin Opiniano went to PGSO to fix the ceiling where the
water leak was coming from. They borrowed the key to the office from Leonila
Dakay. They claim to not have noticed anything unusual. Joel Romero saw Raul
and Edelwin working. He wanted to get the ladder which was borrowed from
him, but when he saw that it was still being used, he just went on with his tasks.
Raul and Edelwin returned the keys to Leonila around 11:00 AM.

In the afternoon of the same day around 1:00 o’clock, Engr. Jonathan
Bacierto borrowed the keys to the office from Leonila Dakay because he had to
work on “programs of works”. He opted to do the same on the weekend since he
had to go somewhere else on the next working day. He also did not notice
anything unusual inside the office aside from the hole on the ceiling where the
leak was dripping from and the ladder used by the workers. When he finished
what he was doing at around 4:00 PM, he made sure to lock the door, and
noticed a male person he is not familiar with, sitting on the bench outside the
office. Engr. Bacierto described such person to have curly hair, with average
height, in his mid-20s, and was wearing a white t-shirt. Engr. Bacierto then
returned the keys to Leonila.

The guards on duty that weekend from 7:00 AM of May 19, Saturday, to
7:00 AM of May 21, Monday, were Henry Villa, Raul Dato, and Cristolo
Torres. According to Raul Dato, he went roving at around 8:30 AM of May 19
and does not remember being a roving guard the rest of the day or the day after.
Cristolo Torres went roving at 11:00 in the evening on that Saturday and does
not remember what time he went roving on Sunday. Henry Torres said he went
roving at 8:00 AM on May 19, and does not remember when he went roving the
next day. However, on May 20, Sunday, at around 9:30 in the evening, Henry,
while he was passing by the PGSO, noticed that the door to the office was ajar.
He called the attention of Raul Dato. When Raul saw the same, he merely
locked the door without looking inside.

On May 21, 2018, at around 7:00 o’clock in the morning, when Fernando
Trongcoso, in the presence of Leonila Dakay and some other employees of
PGSO opened the door to said office, they noticed that some of the office
cabinets and drawers were already opened and papers scattered on the floor. The
wooden stick used as lock on one of the sliding windows was already on the
floor. Fernando Trongcoso particularly noticed Gemma Go’s cubicle so he went
to Gemma’s residence to inform her of the incident.

When Gemma arrived at PGSO at 7:20 in the morning, her cubicle was a
mess and her files were scattered on the floor. The padlock to her office cabinet
where she kept her laptop was ransacked and she found that said laptop was
gone. One of the guards, Henry Villa, noticed a knife belonging to another
employee on top of Gemma’s desk, which he thinks was used to destroy the
padlocks.
 OBSERVATIONS

The following are the investigators’ observations:

1. The PGSO personnel were remiss of their responsibility to care for

and maintain the facilities of the province. In fact, the broken
window locks of the PGSO which were mentioned in the
investigation, and which may have been the means of entry of the
culprit, have been found to be broken since around 2016, yet said
office did not take any action to fix the same. Said office had since
been using a wooden stick as lock which could possibly fall when
the windows are shaken.

Furthermore, the keeper of the keys to the office was unmindful of

her responsibility to make sure the office is locked and properly
secured after the same has been used. Leonila Dakay did not at all
check the office neither in the morning nor in the afternoon after
the keys have been returned to her.

2. The security guards/aides do not have any systematic procedure

that would strengthen the security of persons and property within
the capitol premises. All three security guards on duty that weekend
when the alleged robbery might have taken place attested that they
are not required to become roving guards at certain regular intervals
of time. What can be deduced from the testimonies of the three
security guards interviewed is that they only check some areas
within the capitol premises when they seem like doing so.

It was also found that these security guards are accustomed to leave
their posts during meal breaks without a reliever.

In addition, the guards were allowed to work on a 48-hour shift.

They cannot be expected to remain attentive at their posts for 48
 hours straight, without compromising the alertness, vigilance and
attentiveness required of the job.

Although based on the investigation conducted, no particular employee

may be considered liable for, or a suspect to, the above-alleged robbery, it is
most important to prevent recurrence of similar incidents.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Upon conclusion of the investigation, to ensure the protection of the

provincial government’s property as well as the employees working therein, it is
recommended that:

1. There should be a more stringent screening process in hiring security

guards, which would assess their ability to discharge their duties
competently. An extensive interview, recommendations, background
and medical check may be included.

Formal training programs should also be required of security guards.

The amount of training needed to be determined by the Civil Security
Office (CSO) may include security techniques, investigations, report
writing, patrolling tactics, and emergency procedures.

Guards should be on duty not more than 12 consecutive hours per

scheduled shift. The CSO should deploy enough number of guards,
who would be stationed at all possible points of entry to the capitol
premises, and there should be one or two roving guards per shift.

It is also strongly recommended that the CSO undertake to impose a

standard, methodical, specific, and systematic procedure for the guards
to follow when on duty.
 2. The Provincial Government Services Office (PGSO) should be more
efficient in managing the facilities, supplies and resources of the
provincial government. It should also implement accountability
mechanisms to ensure the performance and efficiency of said office’s
maintenance and operations programs.

PROVINCIAL LEGAL OFFICE

Province of Northern Samar

By:
Atty. Bikki A. Ganzo-Poso
Legal Officer

Recommending Approval:

Atty. Rosa Leah L. Tepace-Estudillo

Provincial Legal Officer