You are on page 1of 7

Republic of the Philippines

Department of the Interior and Local Government


NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION
National Capital Region
4 Floor NAPOLCOM Building
th

371 Gil Puyat Ave., Makati City

NATIONAL POLICE
COMMISSION-NCR,
Complainant,

-versus- SD Case No: NCR-2017-0030


For: Grave Misconduct

PO3 ARNEL D. CANONIGO


Respondent.
x-------------------------------------------x

COUNTER-AFFIDAVIT

I, Respondent PO3 ARNEL CANONIGO, of legal age, Filipino


citizen, a member of the Philippine National Police currently
assigned at District Traffic Enforcement Group of Quezon City Police
District, and a resident of No. 11 Villa Baltazar St., Palatiw, Pasig
City, after having been duly sworn to in accordance with law, do
hereby state THAT:

1. I am the respondent in the above-captioned administrative


case;

ADMISSIONS/DENIALS

2. I VEHEMENTLY and CATEGORICALLY DENY the


allegations contained in the Affidavit of Complaint, and the Pre-
Charge Investigation Report issued in relation to the administrative
charge for Grave Misconduct and Conduct Unbecoming of a police
officer filed against me for atrocious acts and display of detestable
attitude which is not expected of a police officer who has a sworn
duty to serve and protect the people, which I allegedly committed on
January 8, 2017, for UTTER LACK OF EVIDENCE, being merely

1
based on UNSUBSTANTIATED and UNFOUNDED allegations, all
of which are nothing but mere products of CONJECTURES and
SPECULATIONS;

3. Specifically, I VEHEMENTLY and CATEGORICALLY


DENY the allegations contained in paragraph 2 of the Salaysay ng
Pagrereklamo of Marites Presto, insofar as it states that while I’m
doing my worked as a manicurist in front of the house of my parents-
in law, I was surprised when PO2 ARNEL CANONIGO suddenly hit
me with his car. I know that it was intentional as witnessed by the
by-passers, (“habang nag mamanicure ako sa harap ng bahay ng
aking byenan nagulat nalang ako ng bigla akong sinagasaan ni PO2
ARNEL CANONIGO alam kong sinadya nya marami ang nakakita),
for being FALSE. The truth of the matter is that, the incident was
took place sometime in 2014, when as I left our house and driving,
suddenly appeared a child in front of my car. I turned the steering
wheel to avoid the accident. However, unintentionally hit Mrs.
Presto, who was doing a manicure to her customer nearest to our
house. Subsequently, she filed a complaint before the Barangay
Captain of Palatiw, Pasig City;

4. Also, the statement in paragraph 3 of the same Salaysay ng


Pagrereklamo, alleging that I pointed my fingers to Marites Presto
and to her mother-in-law, Josephine with threats, (dinuro-duro ko
siya at ang kanyang byenan na si Josephine at pinagbantaan), is also
VEHEMENTLY and CATEGORICALLY DENIED for being FALSE
and LIES. The truth of the matter is that, I didn’t point my fingers
nor threatened Mrs. Marites Presto and her mother-in-law, Josephine.
I talked to them and asked for a sorry during the confrontation to
which Mrs. Marites Presto accepted. Thus, the complaint was already
settled and terminated before the Barangay Captain of Palatiw, Pasig
City;

5. Paragraph 4 of the same Salaysay ng Pagrereklamo is also


VEHEMENTLY and CATEGORICALLY DENIED, insofar as it
alleges that I threatened to shot Mrs. Marites Presto and will
implicates others, (binantaan ko silang barilin isa-isa at damay-
damay na), for UTTER LACK OF BASIS and EVIDENCE, and for
being PURELY CONJECTURAL and HIGHLY SPECULATIVE.
Why will I do this to the family of Mrs. Josephine, mother-in-law of
Mrs. Marites Presto and to Mr. Diosdado Dadeng Presto, which I
know an unlawful and felonious act. I have known them as a long-
time neighborhood and they have my full respect since when I was
still young. Hence, there is no reason for me to do an unlawful act
because they had been good to me as well as to our constituents;

2
6. I VEHEMENTLY and CATEGORICALLY DENY the
allegation in paragraph 10 of the Salaysay ng Pagrereklamo of Mrs.
Marites Presto, insofar as it alleges that on February 24, 2017, I
“cursed” Mrs. Marites Preto and followed her to their house and
knocked my fist on their door, (pinagmumura ko sya at sinundan ko
raw ito sa bahay at sinuntok ang kanilang pinto), for being FALSE.
The truth of the matter is that, at 11:00 o’clock on February 8, 2017, I
saw Mrs. Marites Preto outside, and when I came closer to talk with
her, she suddenly ran and went home to their house. I didn’t follow
her anymore because she does not want to see and talk with me. To
my mind, it shows without saying that she’s afraid because of what
she did to my son, Malden John Canonigo on January 5, 2017 1. Thus, I
never cursed nor I threats Mrs. Marites Preto and we didn’t talk
thereafter. However, to my surprise, a complaint was filed by Marites
against me.

7. I VEHEMENTLY and CATEGORICALLY DENY the


allegation contained in the last paragraph of the Salaysay ng
Pagrereklamo of Mrs. Marites Presto, insofar as it alleges that I often
shots my gun and several complaints was filed against me in the
Barangay, (madalas akong magpaputok ng baril at marami ng
nagsampa sa akin ng reklamo sa Barangay), for being BASELESS,
UNSUBSTANTIATED, PURELY SELF-SERVING and UTTERLY
FALSE. I never used my gun unless it calls for my duty because I
know that it is against my oath of undertaking as a Police Officer and
the rule of law. If indeed, there were several complaints filed against
me, why no single evidence was shown that there is, if any,
complaint was filed. I was told of the rule that he who alleges must
prove the allegation and not the other way around;

8. I also VEHEMENTLY and CATEGORICALLY DENY the


allegations contained in the Salaysay ng Pagtetestigo of Diosdado
Presto, for being SERF-SERVING, which are reiterations of the
allegations contained in the Salaysay ng Pagrereklamo of Marites
Presto;

9. Also, I VEHEMENTLY and CATEGORICALLY DENY the


allegation contained in the Salaysay ng Pagtetestigo of Agripina
Presto, for being SELF-SERVING;

10. Nonetheless, I hereby bare to this Honorable Office the


indubitable truth, thus:

1
A copy of the Blotter dated February 8, 2017 is hereto attached as ANNEX “A”.
3
10.1. On January 5, 2017, while my son, Malden John
Canonigo, together with his playing mate, was playing
basketball, herein complainant Marites Presto was hit by the
ball. As a consequence, the latter get angry with my son,
thus, she scolded and cursed the little boy with “PUTANG-
INA MO”. Furthermore, when Malden John and my wife,
Nancy Canonigo, are buying “fishball”, Mrs. Marites Preto
told “gago ka” to my son2.

10.2. On February 27, 2017, when my son, Malden John


was playing “turumpo” and unintentionally hit Aling
Saling, the complainant Marites Presto keeps on bullying
the little boy, telling him that he will be reported to the
Barangay because of what he did to Aling Saling. Despite
apology made by Malden John to Aling Saling, complainant
Marites Presto horribly shouted that my son will be
reported to the Barangay. This makes Malden John
incessantly crying as he went home which caused him
terribly afraid to go outside3.

10.3. I am a Police Officer and have a lot of friends


working in different agencies of the government. It is a
natural circumstance that I knew several Police Officer’s
too, but I never used nor influence them to favor my wrong
doings because we abide by law and the rules governing a
citizen and as a public officer. I will not be able to serve for
more than twenty-five (25) years the Philippine National
Police if I do any malice which is not in consonance with my
duty. In fact, I have received Certificates of Commendation
from the National Police Commission, like the following:

a. Certificate of Attendance dated September 4-6, 2013 for


having actively participated in the Police Excellence
and Continuing Education (PEACE) Seminar4;
b. Certificate of Commendation dated June 16, 2014 for
successful anti-criminality operation (OPLAN
LAMBAT/OPLAN SITA) conducted on June 5, 20145;
and
c. Certificate of Commendation dated August 1, 2016, for
the exemplary duties and responsibilities as Traffic
Enforcer6.
2
See ANNEX “A”.
3
A copy of the Blotter dated February 27, 2017 is hereto attached as ANNEX “B”.
4
A copy of the Certificate of Attendance dated September 4-6, 2013 is hereto attached as ANNEX “C”.
5
A copy of the Certificate of Commendation dated June 16, 2014 is hereto attached as ANNEX “D”.
6
A copy of the Certificate of Commendation dated August 1, 2016 is hereto attached as ANNEX “E”.
4
DISCUSSIONS

11. Section 1, paragraph 3 of Rule 21 of NAPOLCOM


Memorandum Circular No. 2016-002 defines misconduct, to wit:

“3) Misconduct or Malfeasance – is any wrongful,


improper or unlawful conduct motivated by pre-
meditated, obstinate or intentional purpose. It
usually refers to transgression of some established
usually refers to transgression of some established
and definite rule of action, where no discretion is
left except where necessity may demand; it does not
necessarily imply corruption or criminal intention.”

12. I was told that the Supreme Court, in the case of Civil
Service Commission v. Ledesma7, discussed the meaning of Misconduct
as a transgression of some established and definite rule of action,
more particularly, unlawful behavior or gross negligence by a
public officer. I was further informed that the misconduct is grave if
it involves any of the additional elements of corruption, willful
intent to violate the law or to disregard established rules which
must be proved by substantial evidence;

13. Moreover, I was informed that in the case of Gonzales v.


Serrano8, the Supreme Court emphasized that corruption, as an
element of grave misconduct, consists in the act of an official or
fiduciary person who unlawfully and wrongfully uses his position or
office to procure some benefit for himself or for another person,
contrary to duty and the rights of others;

14. Furthermore, Section 1, paragraph 5 of Rule 21 of


NAPOLCOM Memorandum Circular No. 2016-002 defines Conduct
unbecoming of a police officer, to wit:

“5) Conduct unbecoming of a police officer refers to


any act or behavior of a Police Officer, irrespective
of rank, done in his official or private capacity,
which, in dishonoring or disgracing himself as a
Police Officer, seriously compromises his character
and standing in the PNP in such a manner as to
indicate his vitiated or corrupt state of moral

7
G.R. No. 154521, September 30, 2005
8
G.R. No. 175433, March 11, 2015
5
character which shows his unworthiness to remain
in the police service”.

15. In addition, the Supreme Court held that conduct


unbecoming of a police officer may also refer to acts or behavior of
any PNP member in an unofficial or private capacity which, in
dishonoring or disgracing himself personally as a gentleman,
seriously compromises his position as a PNP member and exhibits
himself as morally unworthy to remain as a member of the
organization9;

16. In this case, I did not willfully, unlawfully and feloniously


utter invective words against complainant Marites Presto nor follow
her to their house and keep uttering invectives against her thereby
debasing said complainant and disturbed her peace of mind to her
prejudice. The Salaysay ng Pagtetestigo executed both by Diosdado
Presto and his mother Agripina Presto, are SELF-SERVING. Their
relationship to the complainant Marites Presto, as that of a husband-
wife and a mother-in-law relationship shows bias as to their
testimony in their affidavit against me;

17. I was told that in administrative cases, the quantum of


evidence required are substantial evidence which means "more than
a mere scintilla. It is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind
might accept as adequate to support a conclusion10;

18. In the case at bar, no other evidences had been presented


by the complainant, other than the affidavit of her relatives, to prove
that I did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously utter
invectives against her. Thus, the Salaysay ng Pagtetestigo of both
Diosdado Presto and Agripina Presto, which are the only evidence of
the complainant, is inadmissible and therefore insufficient to prove
that I am administratively liable for grave misconduct. Surely, mere
allegation, without sufficient proof, is not enough to prove the
claim;

19. I was informed by my counsel that very basic is the rule


that litigation cannot be properly resolved by suppositions,
deductions or even presumptions, with no basis in evidence, for
the truth must have to be determined by the hard rules of
admissibility and proof (Lagon vs. Hooven Comalco Industries, Inc.
349 SCRA 363). Also, I was told by my lawyer that the Supreme

9
Quiambao vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 128305. March 28, 2005
10
Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 401 (1971)
6
Court has consistently ruled that conclusions based entirely on
conjecture and speculations cannot serve as a basis for conviction;

20. What is clear however is the very high possibility that


herein complainant tries to evade the wrongdoings she committed
against my son, Malden John Canonigo, when complainant Marites
Presto cursed, scolded and bullied him, that causes my son a horrible
and traumatic experience as he now afraid in going outside of our
house.

21. Needless to state, the herein complaint suffers from utter


lack of basis and evidence. All the allegations are baseless,
unfounded, and unsubstantiated as no single proof or evidence was
ever presented in support thereof. Hence, the inevitable outright
dismissal of this case is tenable.

22. I attest to the truthfulness and veracity of all of the


forgoing.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully


prayed of this Honorable Office that the complaint filed against
respondent PO3 ARNEL CANONIGO, be DISMISSED for lack of
merit.

Other reliefs just and equitable in the premises are likewise


prayed for.

Quezon City, 16 May 2017.

PO3 ARNEL CANONIGO


Affiant