This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2011-07-26 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| The making of untruthful statements in the PDS amounts to dishonesty and falsification of an official document. [25] | |||||
|
2010-06-18 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| Respondent cannot escape liability by claiming that she did not have any intention to conceal the identity of the child nor cause the loss of any trace as to the child's true filiation to the child's prejudice. When public documents are falsified, the intent to injure a third person need not be present because the principal thing punished is the violation of the public faith and the destruction of the truth the document proclaims.[11] | |||||
|
2009-02-13 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| A PDS is an official document required of a government employee and official by the Civil Service Commission. It is the repository of all information about any government employee or official regarding his personal background, qualification, and eligibility. Government employees are tasked under the Civil Service rules to properly and completely accomplish their PDS.[30] The act of making untruthful statements, or concealment of any information in the PDS, constitutes dishonesty and is punishable under the Civil Service rules.[31] Dishonesty is a "disposition to lie, cheat, deceive or defraud; untrustworthiness; lack of integrity; lack of honesty, probity or integrity in principle; lack of fairness and straightforwardness."[32] Dishonesty inevitably reflects on the discipline and morale of the service.[33] | |||||
|
2005-09-30 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| Further, while it has been held that making a false statement in a PDS amounts to dishonesty and falsification of an official document,[35] this Court likewise has held that laws and rules should be interpreted and applied not in a vacuum or in isolated abstraction but in light of surrounding circumstances and attendant facts in order to afford justice to all.[36] | |||||