IN RE: ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS

Admin Case No RIASNCR- MP- ADM-17-066

Against FOR: Grave Misconduct

(Irregularity in the Performance of Duty)

PCINSP ALAN MIPARANUM

DHSU, EPD

PO2 Roan Garcia

DDEU, EPD

Respondents

RESOLUTION

This is regarding the administrative case file against PCINSP ALAN MIPARANUM DHSU, EPD and PO2
Roan Garcia DDEU, EPD for an administrative offense of Grave Misconduct (Alleged Irregularity in the
Performance of Duty) as provided in MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR 2016- 002.

The following are the facts of the case, that on or about 9:30 PM of August 6, 2016, while conducting a
buy- bust operation led by PCINSP MIPARANUM at No. 204 MH Del Pilar Street, Brgy. Palatiw, Pasig City,
against Neptali Celestino y Reyes @Nepnep, where PO2 Garcia acted as the poseur buyer together with
a Confidential Informant (CI) were able to buy illegal drugs from @Nepnep. However, before PO2 Garcia
was about to arrest the suspect, the latter sensed that he was dealing with a police officer run towards
the other room of their house and shut the door. After PO2 Garcia run after @Nepnep, he saw the latter
holding a handgun and shot the police officer twice but missed, prompting PO2 Garcia to retaliate and
shot @Nepnep. The suspect was still alive when brought to the hospital but was later declared Dead on
arrival (DOA) by the attending physician.
The issue to be resolved is, whether or not the DAID- SOTG, EPD particularly PCINSP ALAN MIPARANUM
and PO2 Roan Garcia followed the Rules and Regulation of the Police Operational Procedure and their
acts are under the Justifying Circumstances of the said provisions.

Under, PNPM-DO-DS-3-2-13 Rule 8. Use of firearm during police operations it provides:

8.1 Use of Firearm When Justified

The use of firearm is justified if the offender poses imminent danger of causing death or injury to the
police officer or other persons. The use of fi rearm is also justified under the doctrines of self-defense,
defense of a relative, and defense of a stranger. However, one who resorts to self-defense must face a
real threat on his life, and the peril sought to be avoided must be actual, imminent and real. Unlawful
aggression should be present for self-defense to be considered as a justifying circumstance.

Further it is provided for in the Revised Penal Code under Article 11, para 1 - Anyone who acts in
defense of his person or rights, provided that the following circumstances concur: first. Unlawful
aggression; Second. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it; Third. Lack of
sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself.

Furthermore, it is provided in PNPM- DO- DS- 3- 1 that “during an armed confrontation, only such
necessary and reasonable force should be applied as would be sufficient to overcome resistance put up
by the offender; subdue the clear and imminent danger posed by him; or to justify the force/act under
the principles of self defense, defense of relative, or defense of stranger”. However it was also stated
that it was further stated that “A police officer, however, is not required to afford a person attacking
him the opportunity for a fair or equal struggle. His duty requires him to overcome his opponent. In the
lawful performance of his duty, the police officer must stand his ground to accomplish his mandated
task of enforcing the law and maintenance of peace and order”.

In the case at present, it is shown that the act of PO2 Garcia was in accordance with the PNPM-DO-DS-3-
2-13, since there was imminent danger to his person when the suspect @Nepnep shot him not once but
twice. Police officers are given the authority to use firearms during police operations, not to scare or
oppress civilians but to protect not only their person but also of their family and of strangers. It can be
seen based on the facts that PO2 Garcia was lawfully defending himself since all the requisites provided
under the Revised Penal code was present in the case.

To be in sync with the doctrine of stare decisis which provides that decisions must be with reference to
older decisions made in cases with similar facts, we must not prosecute or punish police officers for
enforcing and accomplishing the tasks that are placed in their shoulders. It is also decided in several
cases that police officers are but human who are concerned in preserving their being, it is only human
instinct to do so. That is the main purpose of the lawmakers in drafting a law on self- defense, defense
of relatives and defense of strangers.
After careful perusal of the records of the case, this Summary Hearing Office is convinced that herein
respondent did not commit Grave Misconduct ( Alleged Irregularity in the Performance of Duty), when
he shot the victim after he has been shot twice by the suspect. We reiterate that it is not wrong to
protect your being from unlawful aggressors and danger.

WHEREFORE premises considered, it is recommended that PCINSP ALAN MIPARANUM and PO2 Roan
Garcia , DAID- SOTG, EPD be exonerated from liability since there is no clear and convincing evidence to
support the alleged Grave misconduct (irregularity in the performance of duty). As supported by several
laws their acts are justified by the circumstances that surround the case. Although it is true that police
officers are to protect citizens, it is of greater weight that they protect themselves in order for them to
be able to serve the people better.