View full case

PNP SUPT. FLORENCIO D. FIANZA v. PLEB OF CITY OF BAGUIO

FACTS:

The case involved consolidated petitions for prohibition and declaratory relief filed by various police officers against the People's Law Enforcement Board (PLEB) concerning its jurisdiction over complaints filed by PNP personnel against their superiors. The respondents, who were members of the PNP assigned to the Baguio City Police Station, filed an Amended Complaint with the Baguio PLEB against petitioner Fianza and another PNP officer for alleged grave misconduct and irregularity in the performance of their duties. The respondents claimed that their transfer and removal from the Baguio City Police Station were retaliatory actions for conducting raids on jueteng operations. The petitioner argued that the PLEB does not have jurisdiction over internal organizational matters of the PNP and that the case was not a citizen's complaint but rather a dispute among PNP members/officers.

Subsequently, the PLEB ruled that it had jurisdiction to hear the complaints, considering them as citizen's complaints, and its jurisdiction was upheld by the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM). The PLEB proceeded with the case and set it for hearing. The petitioner, a PNP officer, filed a petition for prohibition and declaratory relief questioning the jurisdiction of the PLEB. Another petitioner, Supt. July Cordoviz, filed a similar petition challenging the jurisdiction of the PLEB over an administrative case filed against him by a subordinate officer. The petitioners argued that the PLEB only has jurisdiction over citizen's complaints, and internal discipline matters within the PNP should be raised with their superiors or commanders. In response, the PLEB and NAPOLCOM asserted that PNP members can file citizen's complaints and that there is no prohibition in the law against PNP members filing such complaints.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the PLEB has jurisdiction to hear and decide the complaints filed against the petitioners.

  2. Whether the complaints against the petitioners can be considered as citizen's complaints.

  3. Whether the People's Law Enforcement Board (PLEB) has jurisdiction over the complaint against petitioner Fianza by respondent policemen regarding the issuance of transfer and dismissal orders.

  4. Whether the PLEB has jurisdiction over the administrative complaint for threats made by a superior officer against another PNP policeman.

RULING:

  1. Yes, the PLEB has jurisdiction to hear and decide the complaints filed against the petitioners. The PLEB, established pursuant to Sec. 43 of Republic Act No. 6975, is part of the PNP's administrative disciplinary machinery. Each PLEB is composed of members chosen by the sangguniang panglunsod/bayan and the peace and order council. The law grants the PLEB jurisdiction to hear and decide citizen's complaints or cases against erring officers and members of the PNP.

  2. Yes, the complaints against the petitioners can be considered as citizen's complaints. Under Sec. 41 (a) of the PNP's enabling act, a citizen's complaint is defined as "any complaint by an individual person against any member of the PNP." The complaints filed against the petitioners fall within the definition of a citizen's complaint as they were filed by individual persons against members of the PNP. The penalties imposable also determine whether a complaint should be brought before the Chief of Police, city or municipal mayors, or the PLEB.

  3. The PLEB has no jurisdiction over the complaint lodged against petitioner Fianza by respondent policemen. The power to transfer and utilize PNP personnel falls within the jurisdiction of the Chief of the PNP and his subordinates. The propriety or illegality of transfer and dismissal orders should be raised before the proper superiors or commanding officers and not before the PLEB.

  4. The PLEB does not have jurisdiction over the administrative complaint for threats made by a superior officer against another PNP policeman. The controversy between them is an internal disciplinary matter, and the members of the PNP themselves are better equipped to understand and address issues of conduct within their ranks. Such complaints should be lodged with their common superior or commanding officer and not with the PLEB.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Under Sec. 43 of Republic Act No. 6975, the PLEB has jurisdiction to hear and decide citizen's complaints or cases against erring officers and members of the PNP.

  • A citizen's complaint is defined as any complaint by an individual person against any member of the PNP.

  • The penalties imposable determine whether a complaint should be brought before the Chief of Police, city or municipal mayors, or the PLEB.

  • The term "private citizens" in the PNP Law and PLEB Rules does not include members of the PNP.

  • The purpose of the PLEB is to enhance civilian participation in disciplining errant PNP members.

  • Matters involving the internal organization or discipline of the PNP should be resolved within the PNP itself.

  • The Chiefs of Police, Provincial Directors, Police Regional Directors, and the PNP Chief have jurisdiction over offences involving breach of internal discipline.

  • The PLEB does not have jurisdiction over matters that fall within the power and authority of the Chief of the PNP and his subordinates, such as the transfer and utilization of PNP personnel.

  • Internal disciplinary matters and complaints concerning police conduct are best addressed by the common superior or commanding officer within the PNP, rather than a civilian body like the PLEB.