Living norms of conduct for public officials
Now, astride the matter at hand, particularly the behavior of the Punong Barangay whose actions were caught by the camera, it is a must that he should explain his conduct satisfactorily.
Daily TribuneNow, astride the matter at hand, particularly the behavior of the Punong Barangay whose actions were caught by the camera, it is a must that he should explain his conduct satisfactorily.
Very recently, a video was posted on Facebook showing the Punong Barangay of a municipality in Northern Samar tearing up the Certificates of Indigency of, the accompanying oral commentary said, two students. Whether or not this video went viral is largely immaterial to our discussion.
For those who are unaware, a Certificate of Indigency is a document issued by the government to individuals and families who are considered financially disadvantaged. This certificate serves as proof that the holder is indigent, as the same is defined by law, and is unable to afford the necessities, such as food, shelter and medical care.
It is normally issued by the Local Government Unit where the indigent lives, or the local Department of Social Welfare and Development therein. It entitles the holder to certain privileges, such as a scholarship, medical services, free legal aid, and exemption from the payment of certain fees due to the government.
Said certificate is thus of substantial value to those who have it, and it reflects the care and concern the government extends especially to poor citizens.
Now, astride the matter at hand, particularly the behavior of the Punong Barangay whose actions were caught by the camera, it is a must that he should explain his conduct satisfactorily.
From the video, the viewer can see that the Punong Barangay, as soon as he received the certificate of indigency presumably for his signature or other official action, tore up the same and sent the students and the one who appeared to be helping them out of what looked like the barangay hall!
The official's reason? The accompanying oral commentary on the video said that either the students themselves or the one helping them were of political persuasions different from his own. Without sufficiently explaining himself, this will be seen as a display of rudeness and impulsiveness, and one of utter disrespect of rights and due process.
It is worth noting that said individual is covered by Republic Act 6713, also known as the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees. This is the law that lays down norms of conduct or standards of behavior that public officials and employees must follow in the exercise of their functions.
RA 6713 provides eight norms of conduct for public officials and employees, but for this article, we will discuss only four.
The first is Commitment to Public Interest. Public officials and employees shall always uphold the public interest over and above personal interest, such as the kind of politics one prefers. But instead of accommodating the indigent students, the barangay official let his narrow politics get hold of him and he destroyed the latter's certificates and showed them the door.
The second is Professionalism. Public officials and employees shall discharge their duties with the highest degree of excellence, professionalism, intelligence and skill. They shall discourage wrong perceptions of their roles as dispensers or peddlers of undue favoritism and patronage. Being rude and disrespectful is the exact opposite of professionalism.
In addition, the public may have the wrong impression that all officials in the Barangay are against indigent citizens, or that if you hold political beliefs different from barangay officials, you are no longer entitled to their assistance and respect.
Third are Justness and Sincerity. Public officials must act with justness and sincerity and shall not discriminate against anyone, especially the poor and the underprivileged. They shall respect the rights of others and shall refrain from doing acts contrary to law, good morals, good customs, and public policy.
As discussed earlier, the certificates of indigency are of substantial value to those who have them. The unexpected destruction of the certificates shocked the conscience, as it was totally without due process, and ran contrary to justice, sincerity to serve the public, law and good customs.
If the certificates were defective or suspect in any way, would tearing them up be the solution for that; and would the Punong Barangay be the proper official to resolve the matter?
Fourth is Responsiveness to the Public. Public officials and employees shall extend prompt, courteous, and adequate service to the public. Public officials and employees shall develop an understanding and appreciation of the socio-economic conditions prevailing in the country, especially in the depressed rural and urban areas.
The official rudely tore up the certificates and showed the students and the person helping them the door did not just respond to the request of the indigenous students discourteously, but displayed no concern for their socio-economic status.
In closing, the norms we just discussed are expected to be ensconced deeply in every public official's heart and mind.
He must live them and become second nature to him. He must live them whether in full view of everyone or his private dealings. He must live them whether it involves issues of small or substantial significance. And he must live them more so when dealing with the less fortunate members of society who need assistance and aid the most.