Category Archives: SAL-N

The purpose of R.A. 6713 (SALN) is to promote a high standard of ethics in public service.

The purpose of R.A. 6713 is “to promote a high standard of ethics in public service.  Public officials and employees shall at all times be accountable to the people and shall discharge their duties with utmost responsibility, integrity, competence, and … Continue reading

Posted in SAL-N | Tagged | Leave a comment

Nowhere in R.A. 6713 does it say that the Review and Compliance Procedure is a prerequisite to the filing of administrative charges for false declarations or concealments in one’s SALN

With regard to the issue concerning compliance with the Review and Compliance Procedure provided in R.A. 6713, this Court already held in G.R. 169982 that such procedure cannot limit the authority of the Ombudsman to conduct administrative investigations.  R.A. 6770, … Continue reading

Posted in SAL-N | Tagged | Leave a comment

Failure to disclose in SALN wife’s business interests and financial connections constituted simple negligence, not gross misconduct or dishonesty

This is the second time Pleyto’s SALNs are before this Court.  The first time was in G.R. 169982, Pleyto v. Philippine National Police Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (PNP-CIDG).[23]  In that case, the PNP-CIDG filed on July 28, 2003 administrative … Continue reading

Posted in SAL-N | Tagged | Leave a comment

Can any public official assert that he is entitled to be informed of any error in his SALN and given the opportunity to correct the same pursuant to Section 10 of R.A. 6713? Can this be a defense from being prosecuted and convicted?

Carabeo asserts that he was entitled to be informed of any error in his SALN and given the opportunity to correct the same pursuant to Section 10 of R.A. 6713, which provides: Section 10. Review and Compliance Procedure. – (a) … Continue reading

Posted in SAL-N | Tagged | Leave a comment

By withholding information on one’s relative/s in the government service as required in the SALN, public office is guilty of falsification considering that the disclosure of such relationship would have resulted in the disapproval of his permanent appointment

Petitioners were charged with falsification of public document under Article 171, paragraph 4 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, which states: Art. 171. Falsification by public officer, employee or notary or ecclesiastic minister. — The penalty of prision mayor … Continue reading

Posted in Falsification of Public Document, LGU, Nepotism, SAL-N | Tagged | Leave a comment

A judge who fails his SALN is GUILTY of violation of Section 7, R.A. No. 3019 and Section 8, R.A. No. 6713

The Court also agrees with the OCA that respondent is guilty of violating Section 7 of R.A. No. 3019 and Section 8 of R.A. No. 6713. Section 7 of R.A. No. 3019 provides: Sec. 7. Statement of Assets and Liabilities. … Continue reading

Posted in Anti Graft and Corruption, Judicial and Legal Ethics, SAL-N | Tagged | Leave a comment

What will happen if public official failed to ascertain that his SALN was accomplished properly, accurately, and in more detail.

The last administrative charge against petitioner is that he failed to declare all his assets in the SALN, of which the Office of the Ombudsman and the Court of Appeals found petitioner guilty. The Court of Appeals made the following … Continue reading

Posted in Administrative Law, Anti Graft and Corruption, Definitions, Evidence, SAL-N | Tagged | Leave a comment