MANILA, Philippines – The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the dismissal of some Bureau of Immigration (BI) employees tagged in the infamous “pastillas” scheme.

In a 27-page decision penned by CA’s Fifth Division chairperson Associate Justice Apolinario Bruselas Jr., the appellate court denied the petition for review filed by BI employees Deon Carlo Albao, Danieve Binsol, and Fidel Mendoza.

“The petition for review in SP No. 176184 is DENIED. The decision of the Ombudsman which found Deon Carlo G. Albao, Danieve H. Binsol, and Fidel S. Mendoza administratively liable for grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interests of the service is AFFIRMED,” the decision read.

In the same decision, the CA also affirmed the decision, which found Chevy Chase Naniong liable: “The petition for review in SP No. 176242 is DENIED. The decision of the Ombudsman, which found Chevy Chase Naniong administratively liable for grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interests of the service is AFFIRMED.”

Associate Justices Geraldine Fiel-Macaraig and Jennifer Joy Ong had concurred.

In early 2020, investigations revealed that Chinese employees of Philippine offshore gaming operators allegedly seamlessly entered the country for a fee of P10,000 per person. The scheme was dubbed pastillas because the alleged payouts were rolled in paper. Later, the payouts became sophisticated and used envelopes and free lunch allegedly provided by the Chinese.

The Office of the Ombudsman’s Field Investigation Office (FIO) was among the agencies to conduct a probe into the allegations. The probe led to the filing of the complaint-affidavit against BI employees “who were alleged to have conspired, confederated, and mutually helped and aided each other to perpetrate the scheme.”

Among the implicated were Grifton Medina, Albao, Binsol, Mendoza, and Naniong.

In its decision, the CA partly granted Medina’s petition and modified the ruling against him. The CA found Medina guilty of simple neglect of duty and ordered his suspension from office for six months without pay.

In an earlier decision, the Ombudsman found the appellants administratively liable for grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service. They were meted the penalty of dismissal from service.

Play Video

In its ruling, the CA said “there can be no doubt” on the existence of the pastillas scheme and “the conspiracy among some of its employees to perpetrate the scheme.” The court added that “participation and involvement” in the scheme constitute grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.

The appellate court said the witnesses’ testimonies constitute reasonable and substantial grounds to believe that Albao, Binsol, Mendoza, and Naniong were involved in the pastillas scheme. However, the same cannot be said of Medina because “there was no mention whatsoever of Medina’s participation therein.” – Rappler.com