Republika ng Pilipinas

Pambansang Pangasiwaan ng
Patubig
(National Irrigation Administration)
Lungsod ng Naga
Office Address: PANGANIBAN DRIVE
NAGA CITY
PHILIPPINES

TELEPHONE NO. 473-8967

TELEFAX NO.: 473-8967
TIN: 000-916-415

MEMORANDUM
FOR

: JOSE V DAYAO, DVM, CESO IV

Regional Executive Director
Department of Agriculture
Regional Field Unit No. 5
San Agustin, Pili, Camarines Sur

FROM

: WILLIAM P RAGODON
Regional Manager
National Irrigation Administration (NIA) Region 5
Pangnaiban Drive, Naga City

DATE

: OCTOBER 3, 2011

RE

: COMMENT

In compliance with the directive contained in the letter-communication dated September

19, 2011 and received on September 22, 2011, hereunder are the comments to the issues of the
email sent to the Office of the Secretary of the Department, a copy is hereto attached as Annex 1
for reference.

In reply to the complaint sent thru email, I am respectfully stating for the record that it is
true that I am the current Regional Manager of the National Irrigation Administration (NIA)
Region 5 but I am holding my Office in Naga City and not in Sorsogon City. As the Regional
Manager, my function is administrative in nature, particularly on the operation of the Office in
my area of jurisdiction. Being the Regional Manager of NIA, I am not a member of the Bids and
Awards Committee (BAC) that facilitates and conducts the bidding process for all the projects

Page 1 of 4

for implementation by the NIA. Not being a member of the BAC nor has the final determination
with regard to whom the project is to be awarded, it is inconceivable for me to ask for a 15%
commission, 5% for the bidding committee and 3% pot money for every project being subjected
to public biddings. True, I may be the signatory of the Contract but my being a signatory thereto
arises from the fact of my being head of the office. The determination of who among the bidders
are qualified to undertake the project and ultimately who among them wins the project rest
entirely on the BAC. The Regional Manager has no participation in the bidding process and so he
has no opportunity to exercise any degree of influence in the determination as to who are
qualified and who wins the bidding. How can he ask for a 15% commission when he has no
participation in the bidding process? His participation comes only after the BACs determination
of the winning bidder and to whom the contract should be awarded as contracts then will already
be signed between the agency and the winning bidder.

In fact, since I took office as Regional Manager of NIA in September 2007, I cannot
recall of any person named PEDRO BONIFACIO with whom I signed a contract for the
construction and implementation of a NIA project. Is PEDRO BONIFACIO a real person, or is it
merely a pseudo name used by individuals who has score to settle against the office or against
the undersigned? If he is a real person, then due process demands that he must substantiate his
allegation with a piece of evidence and not entirely make a sweeping and bare bone allegation of
alleged corruption.

True to say, an allegation that is not substantiated by any piece of document can be
controverted by a bare bone allegation denying the same. Indeed, it has become the duty of the
complainant to at least substantiate his claim with a piece of document otherwise, an injustice is
and will be committed by unduly besmirching the name and reputation of an individual by mere
allegations. The least that we can do, aside from requiring the undersigned for his comment, is to
require the complainant to present a document to substantiate his claim otherwise government
time and resources will just be wasted on an otherwise imagined and concocted complaint from
an individual whom we do not know if he really exists.

If the name PEDRO BONIFACIO is a mere pseudo name, a fortiori, it demands that we
should be more prudent and extra cautious as he does not even have the temerity to reveal his
real identity.

Page 2 of 4

Notwithstanding the requirement for prudency, this is violative of the existing rules and
regulations of the Civil Service Commission regarding the filing of complaints against public
officials and employees, Section 8 of the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil
Service Commission as embodied in Resolution No. 991936, as amended, is very categorical and
quoted, as follows:
Section 8, Complaint. A complaint against a civil service official or employee shall not be
given due course unless it is in writing and subscribed and sworn to by the complainant.
However, in cases initiated by the proper disciplinary authority, the complaint need not be under
oath.
No anonymous complaint shall be entertained unless there is obvious truth or merit to the
allegations therein or supported by documentary or direct evidence, in which case the person
complained of may be required to comment.

The complaint should be written in a clear, simple and concise language and in systematic
manner as to apprise the civil servant concerned of the nature and cause of the accusation
against him and to enable him to intelligently prepare his defense or answer.

The complaint shall contain the following:

a.

Full name and address of the complainant;

b.

Full name and address of the person complained of as well as his position and office of

employment;
c.

A narration of the relevant and material facts which shows the acts or omissions allegedly

committed by the civil servant;

d.

Certified true copies of the documentary evidence and affidavit/s of his witnesses if any;

and
e.

Certification or statement of non-forum shopping.

In the absence of any one of the aforementioned requirements, the complaint shall be
dismissed.

With regard to the official of NIA assigned in Sorsogon who was allegedly requested by
Congressman Escudero to be relieved from his assignment in the province, the complainant

Page 3 of 4

might be referring to Engr. Siervo Manlagit, the Acting Irrigation Management Officer on
Interim Sorsogon-Masbate Irrigation Management Office. Engr. Manlagit has already been reassigned to the Engineering and Operation Division of the National Irrigation Administration,
Regional Office No. 5 in Naga City per Office Memorandum Order No. 30, Series of 2011, copy
of which is hereto attached as Annex 2.

With the foregoing comments and clarifications, the undersigned respectfully trust that he
has clarified that office of the matter pending and respectfully pray for the dismissal of the
complaint as contained in the electronic mail.

Very truly yours,

WILLIAM P RAGODON
Regional Manager

Page 4 of 4