Tiêu đề DECISION_-CALLO-VS-ANDAN.pdf ✅

DECISION (Re: Patricia Callo vs. Angeli Andan; August 29, 2018) FACTS OF THE CASE Last August 29, 2018, an urgent hearing was held to resolve the case of Ms. Patricia Callo vs. Ms. Angeli Andan. The urgent hearing was supposedly held during August 17, 2018, but with the decision of SLIFE together with the defendant’s request, the urgent hearing was moved until after the activity ban. This decision resolves the case of Angeli Andan in her capacity as the Arts College Government Student Services Chair, filed by Ms. Patricia Callo due to her gross negligence and incapacity to fully perform her duties. The case was filed by the defendant on the grounds of the following: 1. Gross negligence of duties 2. Morality of her absences 3. Incapacity to fully perform her duties With the plaintiff’s prayer, the issue lies on whether or not Ms. Andan should be removed from office as SS chair on the grounds manifested by Ms. Callo, together with other sanctions that the court deems appropriate. This decision will act as precedence for future University Student Government Officers that have been proven to be grossly neglectful in his or her duty as an official, or has been proven to violate any provisions of the USG Constitution and its bylaws. On her gross negligence of duties An officer who has committed negligence in their duties differs from one who has been grossly negligent. Negligence of an officer is defined as the failure to use reasonable care and the thoughtlessness in the performance of one’s duties. Gross negligence of an officer is defined as the conscious and intentional failure to use reasonable care and to omit one’s duties whilst being aware of the consequences thereof. With the evidences and testimonies presented, Ms. Angeli Andan exhibited failure to properly supervise and guide her subordinates in fulfilling their duties with the utmost reasonable care. Though the court recognizes her leadership style of task delegation, as emphasized heavily by the counsel of the defense, it also acknowledges in a number of instances Ms. Andan’s failure to efficiently and effectively organize and communicate with her team in handling the tasks assigned to them; hence causing there to be a lack of proper guidance towards her subordinates and a failure to completely accomplish the assigned projects such as that of the fix my flowchart and the supposed survey that they were to release.

ACG, thus making the morality of her absences partially neglectful. Aside from these absences, it was shown on the exhibit of evidences that, apart from the activities during her leave of absences where her obligation and responsibilities, there were more than enough evidences that justified the claims of the plaintiff on the defendant’s gross negligence. Most of the negligence of responsibilities took place outside the period of the approved absences. On her incapacity to fully perform her duties The defendant, Ms. Andan has been ineffective and inefficient in performing her duties as SS Chair of the Arts College Government. The plaintiff had adequate evidences together with the testimonies of the witnesses and the affidavits. As stated in Administrative Code, “Ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance therewith. Both elected and appointed officials of the USG are expected to be fully knowledgeable of the duties, responsibilities and limitations imposed by the Constitution, its bylaws and resolutions adopted by the Legislative Assembly.” 4 The inability of the defendant to perform her duties and guide her team as claimed by the Plaintiff, especially during the duration of Ms. Andan’s absence during March 15 to April 6, is backed by Ms. Andan’s ignorance of the law. Again, ignorance of the law excuses no one. Despite the counsel of the defendant’s reasoning that she only acted in good faith, her ignorance of the law does not excuse her incapacity to fully perform her duties. THE RULING WHEREFORE, Ms. Angeli Andan is found GUILTY of gross negligence and incapacity to fully perform her duties as SS chair. Furthermore, Ms. Andan was found to only be partially neglectful in terms of the morality of her absences. Given all the facts and evidences, Ms. Andan is hereby removed from office as the Arts College Government - Student Services Chair. Furthermore, any USG officer who is removed from office due to the gross negligence in their duties or other acts under the articles of impeachment will no longer be allowed to sit in office as either appointed or elected for the remainder of his/her stay in the University. The rationale behind this decision regarding the defendant’s bearing on a future position in the USG stems from the fact that while as an appointed official of the USG, she failed to uphold and has violated the USG constitution and its bylaws; thus, such actions merit that she may not be permitted to claim the position of Vice-President for External Affairs of the USG. Despite the nature of the trial being a complaint hearing, a violation of the constitution, more so of the articles of impeachment, by any USG official constitutes that one’s eligibility to hold an elected position be revoked. This is to uphold the integrity of the USG as per Article III Section 3 of the 4 Resolution No. 2016-43: Administrative Code Chapter 2 Section 6