Resigned DA Undersecretary Sebastian: Scapegoat for incompetence (7)

COMMENTARY

Sebastian was part of the issuance of the questioned order, logically and necessarily, following the principle in law that the act of one is the act of all, his resignation would — and should have been accepted, especially so that his replacement has been appointed.

12. The recognition by the President that there is indeed a sugar shortage in October of this year, if not presently;

13. The subsequent authorization by the President to the newly constituted SRA, following the resignation of its members, to import 150 metric tons of sugar;

14. The repeated pronouncement by the Press Secretary that there is only an artificial shortage resulting allegedly from the hoarding of thousands of bags of sugar in the warehouses of millers, a claim that has not been factually validated;

15. The memorandum of 18 July 2022 issued by Executive Secretary Vic Rodriguez ordered the preventive suspension of 90 days pending the result of the investigation on the sugar snafu, despite Mr. Sebastian's resignation and the appointment of his replacement by the President.

The order of preventive suspension does not seem to hold water as the resignation of Mr. Sebastian appears to be irrevocable. Is the Executive Secretary laying the foundation for the dismissal of Mr. Sebastian from government service for cause leading to the forfeiture of his retirement benefits and perpetual disqualification from holding any public position?

If that is the intention, then there can be no greater cruelty that one could heap on a multi-awarded public servant known for his impeccable integrity.

The resignations of Mr. Serafica and Mr. Valderrama have been accepted, and such acceptance of their resignation seems to indicate that the appointing authority was displeased by their participation in the issuance of Sugar Order 4. If that is so, since Mr. Sebastian was part of the issuance of the questioned order, logically and necessarily, following the principle in law that the act of one is the act of all, his resignation would — and should have been accepted, especially so that his replacement has been appointed. But the Executive Secretary ordered his preventive suspension, which means his resignation was not accepted. And why not? Here lies again the disconnect.

Is the President being intentionally misled or ill-advised to cover up for the incompetence of these officials in the inner sanctum of the corridors of power?