Republic of the Philippines

Department of Environment and Natural Resources

National Mapping and Resource Information Authority
Office of the Administrator

ASN MICHELLE DAYE L. FRANCISCO,

Complainant,

-versus- Re: Sexual Harassment

SN2 EFREN G. AVILES

Respondent,

x------------------------------------------------x

REPLY
(To the Comment Re: CODI ADMIN CASE NO. 02-2016)

Complainant, MICHELLE DAYE L. FRANCISCO, through counsel,

respectfully states:

PREFATORY STATEMENT

This reply is filed in response to the comment of the respondent

dated ____________ wherein he assailed the motion for reconsideration filed
dated __________ questioning the decision rendered by this Honorable
Office dated April 25, 2017 on the basis that there is no evidence
presented by the complainant other than the allegations made in her
complaint affidavit and that there complainant admitted to ASN Javier
that nobody witnessed the said incident.
 On May ___, 2017, Complainant through the undersigned counsel
received a copy of the respondents comment to the motion for
reconsideration.

With all due respect before this Honorable Office, the Complainant
does not find any good reason to reverse or find error to the motion for
reconsideration dated April 29, 2017 which the respondent sought to
question. Hence, she respectfully prays before this Honorable Office that
the comment be dismissed.

In support thereof, the Complainant makes the following

submissions:

DISCUSSION

1
THERE IS NO SHOWING THAT THE ALLEGATIONS ARE NOT EVIDENCE
AND IS NOT EQUIVALENT TO PROOF MERELY ON THE BASIS OF
AFFIDAVIT COMPLAINT AND THE SAME AFFIDAVIT COMPLAINT
UTILIZED IN THE OTHER CASE OF ASN RUBIO DOCKETED AS 03-2016

2
THERE IS NO SHOWING THAT THE COMPLAINANT ADMITTED TO ENS
JAVIER THAT NOBODY WITNESSED THE SAID INCIDENT (EXHIBIT B,
ANNEX D)
 DISCUSSION

I.Respondent claims in his comment that the complaint affidavit of the

complainant corroborated with the complaint affidavit utilized in the
case of ASN Rubio dated May 25, 2017? are pure allegations which are
not evidence and is not a proof thereto. This premise as claimed by the
respondent are merely based on suppositions and conjectures of the
complainant. With all due respect, it is a settled rule that procedural due
process in administrative cases requires substantial evidence which is an
evidence by a reasonable may conclude to justify a conclusion. The
flexibility of the quantum of proof for administrative cases does not go
far without basis in evidence having rational probative force. Mere
uncorroborated hearsay or rumor does not constitute substantial
evidence. 1
II.A case in point has provided that reliance to the complaint and attached
joint affidavit of the investigating officers may have been sufficient to give
rise a prima facie presumption of the charged against the respondent. 2
Respondent in this case failed to consider the corroborative evidence of
the complaint-affidavit used from the ASN case of Rubio which justifies
the latters dismissal as decided by this Honorable Officer in another case.
When the complainant presented her evidence in support of her
allegations in her complaint, this Honorable Office deciding in favor of the

1
Ang Tibay v. The Court of Industrial Relations, G.R. No. L-46496, February 27, 1940
2
Pleyto v. PNP-CIDG, G.R. No. 169982, November 23, 2007
 complainant against ASN Rubio disregarded the totality of the
complainants evidence for failure of the respondent to controvert the
same. Respondent further failed to consider that the allegations of the
complainant in her complaint are of her personal knowledge which
should be admitted in evidence. Thus, the complainant was able to prove
the affirmative allegations in her affidavit.
III.

PRAYER

Counsel for the Complainant

Diane B. de Leon Karla Rose E.
Gutierrez
Legal Intern Legal Intern

Ralph H. Villanueva
Legal Intern

DEVELOPMENTAL LEGAL ADVOCACY CLINIC

De La Salle University
9582 Kalayaan Avenue, Guadalupe Nuevo, Makati City
Contact No. (02) 887-8407
 ATTY. RICARDO A. SUNGA III
Director and Supervising Lawyer
Roll No. 40036
IBP No. 1031897, QC Feb. 18, 2016
PTR No. 2543851, QC Feb. 18, 2016
MCLE Compliance No. V-0019074, April 12, 2016 Pasig City
Unit 408 ACL Suites
72 13 Avenue Cubao Quezon City 1109
th

Email ricardo_sunga@yahoo.com
Cellular +639178542124

COPY FURNISHED:

Atty. Quintin P. Alcid, Jr.

Counsel for the Respondent
114 Himlayan Road Crn. T. Sora Ave.
Unit 103 Bonaventure-Violet Bldg.
Brgy. Pasong Tamo, Quezon City