Lying about one’s age a clear act of dishonesty

Lying about one’s age a clear act of dishonesty "When my uncle was employed in the government, he adjusted his birth year to make it appear that he was 18 years old even if he was only 17 years old then. He used his adjusted birth year in all his records such as GSIS, PAG-IBIG and Civil Service records. What are the implications of his act? Mr. GDear Mr. G, Well-entrenched is the principle that public office is a public trust (Section 1, Article XI, 1987 Constitution). As such, public officers and employees are expected to live up to the highest degree of integrity, ethics, probity, diligence and honesty. Any person who was found to have violated these standards may be meted out with the corresponding penalties.According to your letter, your uncle deliberately supplied a wrong birth year in his government records to make it appear that he was already 18 years old even if he was only 17 years old at that time. He knowingly concealed his true birthdate in his Civil Service records and in government instrumentalities such as the GSIS, PAG-IBIG and BIR. This is a clear act of dishonesty which is not tolerated by our government. Dishonesty is defined as intentionally making a false statement on any material fact, or practicing or attempting to practice any deception or fraud in securing his examination, appointment or registration. It is a serious offense which reflects a person’s character and exposes the moral decay which virtually destroys his honor, virtue and integrity (Retired Employee vs. Manubag, A.M. No. P-10-2833, December 14, 2010 citing Office of the Court Administrator vs. Bermejo, AM No. P-2004, March 14, 2008). The accomplishments of official forms of the government are done under oath and the making of untruthful statements therein amounts to dishonesty and falsification of official documents. These acts warrant the imposition of disciplinary sanctions in accordance with the Civil Service Rules and Regulations and other pertinent laws. The Supreme Court, in the Administrative Case for Dishonesty and Falsification of Official Document: Benjamin R. Katly (A. M. No. 2003-9-SC - March 25, 2004), had the occasion of stating the applicable penalty for these acts, to wit:“Under Section 23, Rule XIV of the Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V of EO 292 and other Pertinent Civil Service Laws, dishonesty and falsification of public document are considered grave offenses for which the penalty of dismissal is prescribed even at the first instance. Section 9 of said Rule likewise provides that ‘The penalty of dismissal shall carry with it cancellation of eligibility, forfeiture of leave credits, and retirement benefits, and the disqualification for re-employment in the government service. This penalty is without prejudice to criminal liability of the respondent.’” Moreover, knowingly supplying false information in documents made under oath also constitutes the crime of falsification as defined and punished under Article 171 of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines.Please be reminded that this opinion is solely based on your narration of facts and our appreciation of the same. The opinion may vary if other facts are added or elaborated.We hope that we were able to address your concern.Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to dearpao@manilatimes.net." - https://www.affordablecebu.com/