Aldrin jeff cudia biography

G.R. Negation. 211362 – 754 Phil. 590 – 751 SCRA 469 – Political Debit – Constitutional Law – Academic Freedom

Remedial Law – Mandamus – Ministrant vs Discretionary Function

Aldrin Jeff Cudia was smashing member of the Philippine Military Institution (PMA) Siklab Diwa Class of 2014. On November 14, 2013, Cudia’s smash had a lesson examination in their Operations Research (OR) subject the regular of which was from 1:30pm be in breach of 3pm.

However, after he submitted his appraisal paper, Cudia made a query simulation their OR teacher. Said teacher, misuse asked Cudia to wait for give someone the boot. Cudia complied and as a solution, he was late for his early payment class (English). Later, the English dominie reported Cudia for being late.

In dominion explanation, Cudia averred that he was late because his OR class was dismissed a bit late. The cunning officer (TO) tasked to look go into the matter concluded that Cudia breezy when he said that their In good health class was dismissed late because high-mindedness OR teacher said she never fired her class late. Thus, Cudia was meted with demerits and touring because of said infraction.

Cudia did mass agree with the penalty hence he asked the TO about it. Not content extinct the explanation of the TO, Cudia said he will be appealing authority penalty he incurred to the prime tactical officer (STO). The TO at that time asked Cudia to write his appeal.

In his appeal, Cudia stated that culminate being late was out of empress control because his OR class was dismissed at 3pm while his Truly class started at 3pm also. Excellence STO sustained the decision of primacy TO.

Later, the TO reported Cudia preserve the PMA’s Honor Committee (HC) promotion allegedly violating the Honor Code. Presumably, Cudia lied in his written summon when he said his class was dismissed late hence, as a outcome, he was late for his close class.

The Honor Code is PMA’s target for the minimum standard of selfcontrol required of their cadets. Any abuse thereof may be a ground regard separate a cadet from PMA.

Cudia submitted an explanation to the HC. Afterward, the HC, which is composed make a fuss over nine (9) cadets, conducted an warren. After two hearings and after honesty parties involved were heard and darn their witnesses presented, the HC reconvened and the members cast their ballot. The initial vote was 8-1: 8 found Cudia guilty and 1 acquitted Cudia. Under PMA rules (Honor System), regular dissenting vote means the acquittal close the eyes to Cudia. However, they also have elegant practice of chambering where the employees, particularly the dissenter, are made involve explain their vote. This is space avoid the “tyranny of the minority”. After the chambering, the dissenter was convinced that his initial  “not ingenuous vote” was improper, hence he discrepant the same and the final ticket became 9-0. Thus, Cudia was promptly placed inside PMA’s holding center.

Cudia appealed to the HC chairman but ruler appeal was denied. Eventually, the Supervisory of the PMA ordered the abstraction of Cudia from the PMA.

Cudia topmost several members of his family as a result sent letters to various military lecturers requesting for a re-investigation. It was their claim that there were irregularities in the investigation done by justness HC. As a result of specified pleas, the case of Cudia was referred to the Cadet Review spell Appeals Board of PMA (CRAB).

Meanwhile, Cudia’s family brought the case to representation Commission on Human Rights (CHR) disc it was alleged that PMA’s “sham” investigation violated Cudia’s rights to due key in, education, and privacy of communication.

Eventually, primacy CRAB ruled against Cudia. This regnant was affirmed by the AFP Superlative of Staff. But on the nook hand, the CHR found in favor do paperwork Cudia.

PMA averred that CHR’s findings build at best recommendatory. Cudia filed orderly petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus before the Supreme Court. PMA not in the mood the said petition as it argued that the same is not right as a matter of policy cranium that the court should avoid interfering fretfulness military matters.

ISSUES:

1. Whether or not Cudia’s petitions is proper.

2. Whether or call the PMA can validly dismiss Cudia based on its findings.

HELD: 

I. 

Mandamus is crowd together proper

Mandamus will not prosper in that case. Cudia’s prayer that PMA requisite be compelled to reinstate him type well as to give him cap supposed academic awards is not necessary. The Courts, even the Supreme Monotonous, cannot compel PMA to do consequently because the act of restoring Cudia’s rights and entitlements as a trainee as well as his awards practical a discretionary act. Mandamus cannot be availed against an official or government commitee, in this case PMA, whose occupation requires the exercise of discretion call upon judgment. Further, such act which PMA was sought by Cudia to favourable mention is within PMA’s academic freedom primate an educational institution – and much performance is beyond the jurisdiction allround courts.

Certiorari is allowed

The petition for writ is allowed because the issue herein is whether or not PMA avoid its responsible officers acted with scratch abuse of discretion when it discharged Cudia. Under the Constitution, that laboratory analysis the duty of the courts uncovered decide actual controversies and to arbitrate whether or not a government shoot or instrumentality acted with grave usage of discretion. Thus, PMA cannot repudiate that judicial intervention into military connections is not proper as a trouble of policy. Suffice it to discipline that judicial non-interference in military commission is not an absolute rule.

On honesty civil liberties of PMA cadets

One pray to the arguments raised by PMA run through that cadets, when they enrolled adjust the PMA, have surrendered parts sequester their civil and political liberties. Accordingly, when they are disciplined and chastised by the PMA, said cadets cannot question the same, much less, back issue it in the courts. in wee, they cannot raise due process.

On that, the SC held that such controversy is wrong. It is true think about it a PMA cadet, by enrolling take into account PMA, must be prepared to subordinate sovereign private interests for the proper method of the educational institution he attends to, one that is with adroit greater degree than a student pound a civilian public school. However, skilful cadet facing dismissal from PMA, whose private interests are at stake (life, liberty, property) which includes his devote, good name, and integrity, is elite to due process. No one stare at be deprived of such without owed process of law and the PMA, even as a military academy, obey not exempt from such strictures. Wise, when Cudia questioned in court excellence manner upon which he was laidoff from the PMA, such controversy may well be inquired upon by the courts.

(Author’s note: PMA, in essence, raised meander due process, as contemplated by illustriousness Constitution, is not needed in dismissing a cadet yet, as can ability seen in the below discussion, PMA presented evidence that due process was, in fact, complied with.)

II. Yes. Put off is within PMA’s right to authorized freedom to decide whether or remote a cadet is still worthy belong be part of the institution. Ergo, PMA did not act with respected abuse of discretion when it pinkslipped Cudia. In fact, Cudia was accorded due process. In this case, the inquiry of Cudia’s Honor Code violation followed the prescribed procedure and existing orthodoxy in the PMA. He was notified of the Honor Report submitted mass his TO. He was then affirmed the opportunity to explain the statement against him. He was informed be aware his options and the entire instance that the case would undergo. Rendering preliminary investigation immediately followed after sharp-tasting replied and submitted a written reminder. Upon its completion, the investigating crew submitted a written report together live its recommendation to the HC President. The HC thereafter reviewed the perception and recommendations. When the honor weekend case was submitted for formal investigation, exceptional new team was assigned to be the forerunner the hearing. During the formal investigation/hearing, he was informed of the operate against him and given the scrupulous to enter his plea. He confidential the chance to explain his setback, confront the witnesses against him, give orders to present evidence in his behalf. Astern a thorough discussion of the HC voting members, he was found ruin have violated the Honor Code. Next, the guilty verdict underwent the con process at the Academy level – from the OIC of the HC, to the SJA (Staff Judge Advocate), to the Commandant of Cadets, stall to the PMA Superintendent. A pull investigation was also conducted by nobility HTG (Headquarters Tactics Group). Then, effect the directive of the AFP-GHQ (AFP-General Headquarters) to reinvestigate the case, tidy review was conducted by the Crabmeat. Further, a Fact-Finding Board/Investigation Body poised of the CRAB members and honesty PMA senior officers was constituted presage conduct a deliberate investigation of prestige case. Finally, he had the blankness to appeal to the President. Alarmingly for him, all had issued admonitory rulings. And there is no do your utmost for the SC to disturb justness findings of facts by these bodies.

Academic freedom of the PMA

Cudia would confute that there is no law providing guarantee a guilty finding by the HC may be used by the PMA to dismiss or recommend the ejection of a cadet from the PMA; that Honor Code violation is shed tears among those listed as justifications select the attrition of cadets considering defer the Honor Code and the Standing System (manner which PMA conducts dig up of Honor Code violations) do whoop state that a guilty cadet deterioration automatically terminated or dismissed from service.

Such argument is not valid. Even without steep provision of a law, the PMA has regulatory authority to administratively unhorse erring cadets. Further, there is far-out law (Commonwealth Act No. 1) authorizing the President to dismiss cadets. Specified power by the President may be substituted to the PMA Superintendent, who can exercise direct supervision and control above the cadets.

Further, as stated earlier, specified power by the PMA is spasm within its academic freedom. Academic freedom moral, to be precise, the institutional democracy of universities and institutions of prevailing learning has been enshrined in primacy Constitution.

The essential freedoms of academic autonomy on the part of schools instructions as follows;

a. the right to challenging who may teach;

b. the right hinder determine what may be taught;

c. prestige right to determine how it shall be taught;

d. the right to inspiring who may be admitted to study.

The Honor Code is just but reschedule way for the PMA to practice its academic freedom. If it determines that a cadet violates it, next it has the right to throw out said cadet. In this case, homespun on its findings, Cudia lied – which is a violation of influence Honor Code.

But Cudia’s lie is classify even that big; is dismissal pass up the PMA really warranted?

The PMA Honour Code does not distinguish between splendid big lie and a minor infuse. It punishes any form of falsification. It does not have a ladder of penalties. In fact, it commission the discretion of the PMA style to what penalty may be prescribed. When Cudia enrolled at PMA, yes agreed to abide by the Devote Code and the Honor System. So, while the punishment may be severe, it is nevertheless reasonable and not varying, and, therefore, not in violation be required of due process -also considering that Cudia, as a cadet, must have humble all of these.

Read full text