Dear PAO,

I am happy to know that your office is answering queries pertaining to legal matters/issues. I would like to ask this question: Can a government employee be charged administratively? For instance, Mr. A is a male teacher, can he be charged administratively based only on his act committed relative to his official functions during office hours? What if he committed misconduct at a park (on a Sunday) by punching Mr. B whom he argued with, can he be charged administratively?

Mr. Illuminado

Dear Mr. Illuminado,

As a government employee, a teacher may only be charged administratively for misconduct if the acts complained of are related to his/her official duties/functions. Otherwise, acts that violate the right of other individuals committed by him/her not related to his/her official duties and responsibilities are private matters that need to be settled privately. Hence, the victim may file the appropriate action in court for redress.

The Supreme Court, in the case of Eliseo M. Tenza vs. Rodolfo M. Espinelli (A.M. No. P-2095 October 23, 1981), had the occasion to enunciate the following:

“Misconduct in office has a definite and well-understood legal meaning. By uniform legal definition, it is a misconduct such as affects his performance of his duties as an officer and not such only as affects his character as a private individual. In such cases, it has been said at all times, it is necessary to separate the character of the man from the character of the officer (Mechem supra, section 457). ‘It is settled that misconduct, misfeasance, or malfeasance warranting removal from office of an officer, must have direct relation to and be connected with the performance of official duties amounting either to maladministration or wilful, However, according to the Code of Ethics for Professional Teachers, there are standards, by which teachers are mandated to live by. To mention a few, Sections 3 and 7, Article III thereof provides:

“Section 3. Every teacher shall merit reasonable social recognition for which purpose he shall behave with honor and dignity at all times and refrain from such activities as gambling, smoking, drunkenness, and other excesses, much less illicit relations.

“Section 7. Every teacher shall maintain harmonious and pleasant personal and official relations with other professionals, with government officials, and with the people, individually or collectively.”

Likewise the said code provides for penal sanction for every violation thereof, to wit:

“Article XII: Disciplinary Actions

Section 1. Any violation of any provision of this code shall be sufficient ground for the imposition against the erring teacher of the disciplinary action consisting of revocation of his Certification of Registration and License as a Professional Teacher, suspension from the practice of teaching profession, or reprimand or cancellation of his temporary/special permit under causes specified in Sec. 23, Article III or R.A. No. 7836, and under Rule 31, Article VIII, of the Rules and Regulations Implementing R.A. 7836.”

Perhaps, the teacher who inflicted bodily harm against the person whom he exchanged heated discourse with may be held administratively liable under the abovementioned code.

Again, we find it necessary to mention that this opinion is solely based on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. The opinion may vary when the facts are changed or elaborated.

We hope that we were able to enlighten you on the matter.

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .