

ANTI-RED TAPE ACT (R.A.9485)

 BASIS FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION
 OVERSIGHT BODIES AGAINST CORRUPTION
 THE ROLE OF OMBUDSMAN
 OPERATIONAL THRUST OF ETHICS AND ACCOUNTABILITY
 LEVELS OF ETHICS
 TOWARDS ETHICAL AND ACCOUNTABLE GOVERNANCE

A Narrative Report Presented to the Faculty

of the College of Accountancy, Business, Economics
and International Hospitality Management – Graduate School
Batangas State University
Batangas City

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirement for the Subject
PA 603 Ethical Challenges in Public Management

Submitted to:
DR. CORA M. DALANGIN

By:
EnP MARY ANN E. ANTENOR, MPA

November 2019
 ANTI-RED TAPE ACT (R.A.9485)/ BASIS FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION/ OVERSIGHT BODIES
AGAINST CORRUPTION/ THE ROLE OF OMBUDSMAN/ OPERATIONAL THRUST OF ETHICS AND
ACCOUNTABILITY/LEVELS OF ETHICS/ TOWARDS ETHICAL AND ACCOUNTABLE GOVERNANCE

NARRATIVE REPORT

By:
EnP MARY ANN E. ANTENOR, MPA
Doctor of Public Administration, Student

TOPIC 1: ANTI-RED TAPE ACT (RA 9485)

Everyone of us always heard of sounds “ARTA”. And more often, we responded that we know about
this Act, however, not all of us were familiar with the provisions of the said law. ARTA can be described in
many ways. The full title of the law itself, “An Act to Improve Efficiency in the Delivery of Government Service
to the Public by Reducing Bureaucratic Red Tape, Preventing Graft and Corruption, and Providing Penalties
Thereof”, says a lot. But ultimately, ARTA is about the citizens. It is about the government satisfying the
citizens as its customers/clients in every public service it offers. It is about the citizens being the center of
government efforts.
In the field of public administration, this is all about the deepening crisis of credibility and competence
suffered by public organizations. These issues relates to corruption, inefficiency and bureaucratic Red Tape
which are considered to be of major concerns for many government’s initiative to come up with robust
institutional frameworks and in order to curb bureaucratic problems.
In the Philippine context, there are a number of public sector reform initiatives that have been
implemented. Institutional mechanisms on corruption, red tape and inefficiency were enacted over a few
decades, however, as observed the country is still grappling with the same old issues and challenges. One
may ask are these problems have something to do with the kind of bureaucracy the country has, including its
processes, leadership, structures, public ethics and cultural values? It is up to us, to what extent these issues
will affect the system surrounds us.

On the context of the discussion on red tape, the main purpose of crafting a bill on anti-red tape was
based on the demands of the public regarding the proliferation of delays, inefficiencies, confusing, lengthy
and pointless procedures and processes that often times brings the public at the mercy of the civil servants
and bureaucratic impulses and notions. Even the business community has raised its concerns on the
burdensome and lengthy procedures that hinder business growth and employment opportunities.

With the citizens at the center, ARTA aims to bring about changes, especially in the public sector
mindset. It reverses the old service delivery model that puts primacy on the role of the agency and leaves the
customers, in this case-the citizens, out of the picture. In simple words, the program puts the citizens at the
center of the service delivery system. We envision a landscape of openness. Openness to customer feedback
and third-party assessment towards the end of improving the public’s experience with government services.
But how does ARTA make these changes possible?

The law provides access to public service information that matters. ARTA requires all government
offices providing frontline services to post Citizen’s Charters. These Charters are the commitments of
agencies on what their customers should expect during transactions. It also increases citizens’ accessibility
for government feedback. Through the program’s Report Card Survey, gathers citizens’ feedback within the
premises of government offices immediately after the citizens’ availment of frontline services. The RCS
strategically targets government agencies that received the most number of ARTA-related feedback in the
CCB. Through the RCS, citizens rate and assess the service delivery performance of these agencies in terms
of the following areas: Compliance with the Citizen’s Charter service standards, Anti-fixer campaign, no hidden
costs, PACD, no noon break compliance, ID, and client satisfaction with the service quality, frontline service
provider, physical setup, basic facilities, and general contentment with the completed transaction.

We take also citizen’s participation as a given in the Integrated ARTA Program. As such, the
challenge is not much about encouraging participation, but maximizing it and utilizing it for improvement of
public service delivery. On this framework, citizens experience the service provided by government offices.
Then, they provide feedback, and CSC gathers the feedback through RCS and CCB. We distill the numerous
customer feedback and data into usable information and create insight. CSC relays the feedback to the
concerned offices and provides assistance through the Service Delivery Excellence Program, for those failed
offices, or through the usual survey exit conferences. Government agencies then use the data to improve and
offer better customer service experience.

We wish to clarify that while it is the CSC that writes letter-reports on CCB complaints, publicizes
Report Cards, it is still the public that ultimately seeks accountability from government. Citizens themselves
provide information. They take time to call and write their complaints. They allow our researchers to interview
them to create office Report Cards. CSC only acts as a springboard for what the public thinks and feels of
government agencies. Our take away from this is that the public has grown to trust us with their precious
opinion. As such, we are very happy that government agencies have responded to our call for openness.
Some GOCCs have adopted the RCS in their performance commitments with the GCG. They acknowledged
that the RCS is a good tool to gauge their clients’ satisfaction level.

In a study conducted by the Ateneo School of Government, through the sponsorship of the USAID,
it was revealed that there are three government office improvements attributable to ARTA. These are the
employees’ behavioral change, physical improvements, and reduced red tape. According to the Ateneo study,
“Through ARTA-RCS results, service offices know if clients are satisfied with the services rendered to them
and what or where their weaknesses are in terms of service delivery. It keeps them on their toes; and they
do their best to comply with the posted standards and ensure fast delivery of service…” Further, in terms of
physical improvements, “Results of the ARTA-RCS serve as basis for the agencies to improve their facilities.
Needs of the service office are identified and improvements/changes are made—fast—making service offices
at par with private offices. The changes/improvements become one of the priorities of the agencies and
become included in their mid- year/term proposals.” Most importantly, as to red tape reduction, “Agencies also
find ARTA-RCS to be significant in curbing red tape as it helps promote transparency, and the agencies agree
that because of the posted Citizen’s Charter, employees become aware of their accountability to the public.
Work processes are followed, requirements for a certain service are clarified, and under-the-table transactions
are diminished. For the agencies, ARTA-RCS is also a way of reviewing the frontline service delivery, and
that is streamlining of documents and shortening the processing time.”

But even with these enhancements, following the ARTA mindset of continuous improvement, we can
certainly do more to overcome the challenges at hand. One challenge is the predominant institutional
approach in crafting and updating Citizen’s Charter.

As a study puts it, “Six years after the formulation and implementation of the Citizen’s Charter,
government agencies in the Philippines have yet to institutionalize citizen/ stakeholder involvement in the
entire Citizen’s Charter cycle. A study by Saguin of five selected LGUs in Metro Manila disclosed the “absence
of stakeholder involvement in the its formulation, … (which together with other issues) act as bottlenecks in
effectively driving improved transparency and citizen engagement as well as preventing corruption in
government service” (2012: 1). Yet, if a document like the Citizen’s Charter were to truly embody the demands
and interests of the citizens, they should be involved in its formulation, implementation, monitoring and update.
Their involvement is deemed necessary to improve the quality of frontline services and in turn, their level of
satisfaction.”

Through this initiative, we hope to collaborate with you to revisit, review and truly streamline our
frontline services. We hope to be strong partners in modelling and leading the pursuit of bottom-up,
participatory governance in the country.

In terms of the objectives of ARTA, the main goals include the simplification of public transactions;
elimination of Red Tape; elimination of fixing activities and professionalization of the delivery of frontline
services. In the excessive regulation to simplified transaction, ARTA requires all government offices to draw
up, post and implement a Citizen’s Charter which identifies the frontline services offered by a particular
agency, limit signatories in the evaluation of applications and other forms to a maximum of five signatures;
act on applications and requests not longer than five working days for simple transactions and not longer than
ten days for complex transactions.

Some of the salient feautures of ARTA are the Citizen’s Charter, Report Card Survey (RCS);
Accessing Frontline Services; Reengineering of Systems and Procedures; and Accountability of Heads of
Offices and Agencies and Disciplinary Action. Citizen’s Charter is an official document, a service standard, or
a pledge, that communicates, in simple terms, information on the services provided by the government to its
citizens. It describes the step-by-step procedure for availing a particular service, and the guaranteed
performance level that they may expect for that service. Report Card Survey is a mechanism designed to
monitor frontline service delivery by rating the performance of an agency and client satisfaction.

In terms of its implications, ARTA facilitates ease in doing business; it creates an atmosphere of
good local governance; it encourages citizen participation in the policy making processes through the Report
Card Survey (RCS) as a feedback mechanism; it facilitates efficiency, effectiveness and economy in the daily
operations of the bureaucracy; it upholds accountability, transparency and ethical conduct; it encourages
reforms in the processes, structures and mindsets; and it thwarts fixers, red tape, inefficiency and corruption.

TOPIC 2: BASIS FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS

All employees are expected to meet performance standards and behave appropriately in the
workplace. Disciplinary or corrective action is a process of communicating with the employee to improve
unacceptable behavior or performance. You may take disciplinary action when other methods such as
coaching and performance appraisal have not been successful. In cases of serious misconduct, you may
choose to proceed straight to disciplinary action.
In the Philippines, there are two (2) laws that includes provisions and various grounds for disciplinary
action against all officials and employees. It includes Presidential Decree No.16 and R.A. 6713. Both discloses
the major grounds for taking disciplinary actions such as Dishonesty; Oppression; Misconduct; Neglect of
duty; Disgraceful and immoral conduct; Being notoriously undesirable, which is of common knowledge;
Discourtesy in the course of official duties; Inefficiency and incompetence in the performance of official duties;
Receiving for personal use a fee, gift, or other valuable thing in the course of official duties or in connection;
Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude; Improper or unauthorized solicitation of contributions from
subordinate employees and by teachers or school officials from school children; Violation of existing civil
service laws and rules or reasonable office regulations; Falsification of official document; Frequent
unauthorized absences or tardiness in reporting for duty, loafing or frequent unauthorized absences from duty
during regular office hours; Habitual drunkenness; Gambling prohibited by law; Refusal to perform official duty
or render overtime service; Disgraceful, immoral or dishonest conduct prior to entering the service; Physical
or mental incapacity or disability due to immoral or vicious habits; Borrowing money by superior officers from
subordinates or lending by subordinates to superior officers; Lending money at usurious rates of interest;
Willful failure to pay just debts or willful failure to pay taxes due to the government; Contracting loans of money
or other property from persons with whom the office of the employee concerned has business relations;
Pursuit of private business, vocation or profession without the permission required by these rules or existing
regulations; Insubordination; and Engaging directly or indirectly in partisan political activities.
In terms of its penalty, any official or employee regardless of whether or not he holds office or
employment in a casual, temporary, holdover, permanent or regular capacity, committing any violation of the
Code shall be punished with a fine not exceeding the equivalent of six (6) month’s salary or suspension not
exceeding one (1) year, or removal depending on the gravity of the offense after due notice and hearing by
the appropriate body or agency. If the violation is punishable by a heavier penalty under another law, he shall
be prosecuted under the latter statute. Violations of section 7, 8, 9 of the code shall be punishable with
imprisonment not exceeding five (5) years or a fine not exceeding 5000 or both and, in the discretion of the
court of competent jurisdiction, disqualification to hold public office. Any violation hereof proven in a proper
administrative proceeding shall be sufficient cause for removal or dismissal of an official employee, even if no
criminal prosecution is instituted against him. Private individuals who participate in conspiracy as co-
principals, accomplices or accessories, with officials or employees, in violation of the Code, shall be subject
to the same penal liabilities as the officials or employees and shall be tried jointly with them. Administrative
proceedings for violation of these Rules shall be in accordance with the Civil Service Law and Rules.

TOPIC 3. OVERSIGHT BODIES AGAINST CORRUPTION

Governance and corruption are invariably seen as one of the top problems in our country. Corruption
scandals and indicators are always well covered in the media, and Non-Governmental Organizations. The
need to research, understand and control corruption is obvious but comes with difficulties. Its hidden nature
makes it hard to establish where, how and until what extend there is political and/or bureaucratic corruption.
High corruption levels severely restrict the efficiency of businesses operating in the Philippines.
Extensive bribery within the public administration and vague and complex laws make some companies
especially multinational companies, vulnerable to extortion and manipulation by public officials.
Favoritism and undue influence are widespread all over the government. In short, corruption is everywhere.
Philippine corruption knows many shapes and forms; Tax evasion; Ghost projects and payrolls;
Evasion of public bidding in awarding of contracts; Passing of contracts; Nepotism and favoritism; Extortion;
Protection Money and Bribery.
Yet the Philippines knows its Anti-Corruption specific constitution, extensive regulatory regime,
supported by presidential proclamations and decrees, executive and administrative orders and official
memoranda. Most striking is the gap between Anti-Corruption rhetoric and reality. Previous president Joseph
Estrada, commissioning the first national Anti-Corruption strategy, was ousted on corruption charges.
 The 1987 Constitution has created constitutional bodies deal on graft and corruption and to
effectively implement provisions of public accountability. These bodies are granted fiscal authority to ensure
their independence and their actions are appealable only to the Supreme Court. These constitutional
bodies are: (1) Ombudsman that investigates and act on complaints filed against public officials and
employees, and serve as the “people’s watchdog” of the government; (2) The Civil Service Commission
which is the central personnel agency of the government which is mandated to establish a career service and
promote moral, efficiency, integrity, responsiveness, progressiveness, and courtesy in the civil service; (3)
The Commission On Audit which is the watchdog of the financial operations of the government and is
empowered to examine, audit, and settle all accounts pertaining to the revenue and receipts of, and
expenditures or uses of funds and property under the custody of the government agencies and
instrumentalities; and (4) The Sandiganbayan which is the Anti-graft court of the Philippines and has
jurisdiction over civil and criminal cases involving graft and corruption and such other offenses
committed by public officers and employee. It is in charge of maintaining morality, integrity, and efficiency in
the public service. Other government anti-corruption bodies are the Department of Justice (DOJ) conducts
preliminary investigations on complaints of a criminal nature against public officials that are filed with the
Department; The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) which
conduct fact-finding investigations on graft cases, and entrapment operations which, if successful, result in
the arrest and filing of criminal complaint against the perpetrators in the courts; The Presidential Commission
on Good Government (PCGG) which was created primarily to go after ill- gotten wealth. It is also tasked to
adopt safeguards to ensure that corruption shall not be repeated and institute measures to prevent the
occurrence of corruption; and The Presidential Commission against Graft and Corruption which was
created under Executive Order No. 151 by then President Ramos to investigate graft and corruption cases in
the executive department.

TOPIC 4. ROLE OF THE OMBUDSMAN

As one of the anti-corruption bodies in the Philippines, R.A. 6770 also known as the “An Act Providing
for the Functional and Structural Organization of the Office of the Ombudsman, and for Other Purposes”, talks
about the powers, functions and duties of the Ombudsman. Under Section 15 of the said law, some of the
powers, functions and duties of the Ombudsman are:
(1) Investigate and prosecute on its own or on complaint by any person, any act or omission of any
public officer or employee, office or agency, when such act or omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper
or inefficient;
(2) Direct, upon complaint against any officer or employee of the Government, or of any subdivision,
agency or instrumentality thereof, as well as any government-owned or controlled corporations to perform and
expedite any act or duty required by law, or to stop, prevent, and correct any abuse or impropriety in the
performance of duties;
(3) Direct the officer concerned to take appropriate action against a public officer or employee at fault
or who neglect to perform an act or discharge a duty required by law, and recommend his removal,
suspension, demotion, fine, censure, or prosecution, and ensure compliance therewith;
(4) Direct the officer concerned, in any appropriate case, and subject to such limitations as it may
provide in its rules of procedure, to furnish it with copies of documents relating to contracts or transactions
entered into by his office involving the disbursement or use of public funds or properties, and report any
irregularity to the Commission on Audit for appropriate action;
 (5) Request any government agency for assistance and information necessary in the discharge of
its responsibilities, and to examine, if necessary, pertinent records and documents;
(6) Publicize matters covered by its investigation of the matters, provided, That the Ombudsman
under its rules and regulations may determine what cases may not be made public;
(7) Determine the causes of inefficiency, red tape, mismanagement, fraud, and corruption in the
Government, and make recommendations for their elimination and the observance of high standards of ethics
and efficiency;
(8) Administer oaths, issue subpoena and subpoena duces tecum, and take testimony in any
investigation or inquiry, including the power to examine and have access to bank accounts and records;
(9) Punish for contempt in accordance with the Rules of Court and under the same procedure and
with the same penalties provided therein;
(10) Delegate to the Deputies, or its investigators or representatives such authority or duty as shall
ensure the effective exercise or performance of the powers, functions, and duties herein or hereinafter
provided;
(11) Investigate and initiate the proper action for the recovery of ill-gotten and/or unexplained wealth.
Aside from the above roles, The Ombudsman shall give priority to complaints filed against high
ranking government officials and/or those occupying supervisory positions, complaints involving grave
offenses as well as complaints involving large sums of money and/or properties.

TOPIC 5. ETHICS AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Given that the topic of ethics and accountability falls within the realm of Public Administration, it is
imperative that the notion of accountability enables the understanding of general and specific perspectives
and helps to show how accountability supports the domain of public administration and management.
Ethics provide accountability between the public and the administration. Adhering to a code of ethics
ensures that the public receives what it needs in a fair manner. It also gives the administration guidelines for
integrity in their operations. That integrity, in turn, helps foster the trust of the community. By creating this
atmosphere of trust, the administration helps the public understand that they are working with their best
interests in mind. Additionally, a code of ethics creates standards of professionalism that co-workers in the
public sector can expect from each other, while the public can also expect the same from their leaders. With
a strong code of ethics in public administration, leaders have the guidelines they need to carry out their tasks
and inspire their employees to enforce laws in a professional and equitable manner.
In general, accountability can be understood as the answerability for performance and the obligation
that elected and appointed officials have to give a satisfactory explanation over the exercise of power,
authority and resources entrusted to them on behalf of the public. It can be contended that accountability is
the fundamental requirement for preventing the abuse of power and for ensuring that power is directed
towards the achievement of efficiency, effectiveness, responsiveness and transparency. Open, transparent
and accountable government is an imperative prerequisite for community-oriented public service delivery
because without it, hidden unethical behavior will result. In theoretical studies, it has been represented that
accountability is the process whereby public organizations, and the employees within them, are responsible
for their decisions and actions and submit themselves to appropriate external examination. It is best achieved
when parties have a sound understanding of those responsibilities, and clearly defined roles within a strong
management structure. In effect, accountability is an obligation for sounds responsibility. This responsibility,
which encompasses a range of concerns, such as values and ethics and the effective and efficient
implementation of programs, entails a range of processes. In leadership roles, accountability is the
acknowledgment of responsibility for actions, decisions, and policies including the administration, governance,
and implementation within the scope of the role or employment position and encompassing the obligation to
report, explain and be answerable for resulting consequences. Accountability is important for good
governance. Appraising the ongoing effectiveness of public officials ensures that they are performing to their
full potential, providing value for money in the provision of public services, instilling confidence in the
government and being responsive to the community they are meant to be serving.
The concept of public accountability capture the following elements: undertaking official
decisions/activities in a transparent way; making optimal use of resources, with no tolerance to corruption;
adhering to ethical and professional standards and regulations; responding to community needs as much as
possible with prioritization; implementing viable mechanisms of providing feedback and information to the
public; and making an effort to foster awareness and civil society participation.
Ethics and accountability are important elements for government. As a facet of governance, it has
been central to debates related to problems in the public sector, non-profit and private, and individual contexts.
Broadly speaking, accountability exists when there is a relationship where an individual or body, and the
performance of tasks or functions by that individual or body, are subject to another’s oversight, direction or
request that they provide information or justification for their actions. In the arena of ethics, accountability is
answerability, enforcement, blameworthiness, liability, and the expectation of account-giving. Answerability is
clarified as the obligation of the government, its agencies and public officials to provide information about their
decisions and actions and to justify them to the public.
The issues of ethics and accountability pose a continuing challenge to the Philippine government.
The mechanisms and ideology that have been put in place, may not yet be the best or ideal in the sense that
ethical and accountable behavior in the public sector is still much to be desired in the Philippines. But, there
is so much hope to hold and believe that there will be many opportunities to lead and change for the best.

TOPIC 6. LEVELS OF ETHICS

In today's world, individuals can make a single decision that can have a profoundly positive or
negative effect on their family, their employer, co-workers, a country, and even on the entire world. The life
we lead reflects the strength of a single trait: our personal character. Personal ethics are different for each
person but for the most part, people want to be known as a good person, someone who can be trusted, and
he or she are concerned about his or her relationships and personal reputations.
It is already proven that the quality of the public services and the role of the public administration in
their implementation have a direct impact on the life of the citizens. In the mutual report of the public
administration and the community, with special importance and often determinative, are the ways of behaviour
of the officials for the duties they have for the people, in the respect of the law. Already it has been proven in
many cases, the damage to the image of the public employees at all levels.
Public administration ethics are based on the central idea that government officials and employees
are stewards of the public. There are four levels of accountability in public administration. First, is the
personal ethics which describes that government employees can inspire citizen confidence in public
agencies through their behavior and this lends greater legitimacy to government actions. Second,
professional ethics in which common stereotypes of many government employees and managers portray
them as lazy, overpaid, incompetent bureaucrats. Ethical behavior in public administration means improving
individual capabilities and encouraging professional development in others. Third, is organizational ethics.
In addition to maintaining standards of personal integrity, public administrators should promote ethical
behavior on an organizational level by enhancing open communication, subordinating agency loyalties to the
public interest, establishing standards for ethical behavior by agency employees and adopting policies that
promote organizational accountability. Fourth, is social ethics in which government employees and
administrators are entrusted with public resources. Proper ethical behavior dictates that public sector workers
act in such a way that best serves the interests of the public. This includes opposing all forms of discrimination,
supporting the public’s right to know what is being done on its behalf, involving citizens in policy decision-
making, communicating to the public in a clear manner and assisting citizens in their dealings with government
agencies.

TOPIC 7. ETHICAL AND ACCOUNTABLE GOVERNANCE

Ethics in public service is about the practical application of the moral standards in governance.
Generally, ethics refers to how an individual feels about behaving properly. It is about values and their
application in a given context. The major factor that affects our understanding of public service’s ethics is the
meaning of the political environment that provides the framework for public services and that correlates its
practice.
Public administration, certainly has its influence on Good Governance in the country. There are not
a few cases of intervention by the government officials directly in the working management, on the rights and
responsibilities that employees or their dependents have been assigned by law. To reduce or to heal this
situation there is only one way, the implementation of ongoing reforms and the regulation of the legal
framework. Both will provide full transparency of public administration in its activities, competence in managing
work, equal treatment of citizens by the law and especially ethics in public relations. The taking of full
responsibilities will create stability in the work of administration, making it efficient and subsequent.
In many cases, the government's fight against corruption is negative. It is a campaign more than the
real fight against this uncontrolled phenomenon. Accountability of public administration begins with the
execution of official duties in strict accordance with the Constitution and the law. Only in these conditions,
public administration employees will perform their duties conscientiously and professionally by putting
themselves more and better in the service of the community. Application of ethical principles in the relations
with people approaches the administration more and more to the problems they have, by increasing the value
and confidence in their government. Consequently, we will have a high professional level in coping with the
needs of people as well as an increase of the public interest for the sounds Ethical and Accountable
Governance of the country. We will stop at two elements of the political environment, related to the role of the
country's constitution and public accountability. Both have a particular impact in the understanding of ethics
in public service for citizens.

CONCLUSION
Anti-Red Tape Act of 2007 is an innovative legislative initiative that promotes good governance. It
introduced a comprehensive host of mechanisms that provides a strategic method in improving the delivery
of frontline services without hidden costs and without delay in the processing of documents. Transacting
business in the public sector is no longer excruciating, high-priced and discriminating. However, there are still
areas that need to be strengthened. This act amounts to bureaucratic red tape, corruption, inefficiency and
unprofessionalism; and to the extent, it destroys the reputation of the entire government system that leads to
people’s disaffection toward its government which they call it as their own ally and protector
In carrying out disciplinary action, we should always build trust and maintain a professional manner by
keeping the disciplinary process confidential between you and the employee. Being in the position as the
department heads or supervisor, we should also make a careful diagnosis of the problem to determine whether
disciplinary action is appropriate. I also believed that we must provide specific examples of performance
discrepancies or work rule violations so the employee fully understands what needs correction. When taking
disciplinary action, make sure the punishment fits the misconduct and communicate clearly so the employee
understands the consequences if performance or conduct does not improve. We must also keep in mind that
discipline is supposed to be constructive. Your goal is to guide the employee to correct performance or
behavior, not to punish the employee. As a general rule, your action should be just enough to get the
employee's attention. However, you may have to take progressively more serious actions if there is no
improvement or if repeat occurrences follow. You need not take each of these actions, but you will normally
take more than one of them.
I want to end up this report with the justifications made by various scholars stating that the
effectiveness of oversight Agencies is hindered by political appointees, weak separation of powers including
check-and-balance mechanism, and weak protection of whistle-blowers. Philippines Anti-Corruption failures
are manifold and harder to point at, being a combination of political-economic and technical issues. The
country suffers from systemic corruption and state capture by political and business elites. This is translated
in a lack of political will and leadership towards a sustained Anti-Corruption drive, resulting in cynicism and
tokenism. Recently progress is made on issue as procurement, Anti-Corruption safeguards and watch dogs,
lacking behind are back-office issues as; information access, transparency in elections, juridical
accountability, (political) financing and budgeting, sustained by a weak implementation of the rule of law.
Transparency is not religiously observed particularly in government transactions. The public is
denied access to activities of government officials. The people are not informed, in detail, of the share of each
executive department, the legislature and the judiciary, in the national budget and how these departments
spend their financial requirements. Effective monitoring of government programs and projects as well as
expenditures are not being seriously undertaken by those tasked to monitor them. They are also vulnerable
to bribery and do not actually conduct thorough inspection but merely rely on information gathered.
In public administration, civil servants have a special responsibility because they are trusted with
managing resources on behalf of the community, delivering services to the community and taking decisions
that affect a citizen’s life. The civil servants have a pivotal role to ensure continuity and change in
administration. However, they are dictated by the rules and procedures which are formulated taking their
advice into account. It is the ‘rule of law’ rather than the ‘rule of man’ that is often blamed for widespread
abuse of power and corruption among government officials. The community, therefore, must be able to trust
the integrity of the civil service decision-making process. Civil executives are expected to uphold high
standards of professionalism, responsiveness and impartiality. Holders of public office are accountable for
their decisions and actions to the public and must submit themselves to whatever scrutiny is appropriate to
their office. In short, accountability is intended to make public officials answerable for their behavior and
responsive to the entity from which they derive their authority. Accountability also indicate establishing criteria
to measure the performance of public officials, as well as oversight mechanisms to ensure that standards are
met.
 Democratic governance operates within a framework of laws that sets the boundaries of government
action. Code of Ethics calls on public administrators to understand and apply laws and rules that affect their
personal traits, profession, organizational work to improve counterproductive laws and policies, establish
procedures for proper addressing social concerns, protect privileged information and promote constitutional
principles of due process, equality and fairness. One of the biggest challenges facing government agency
administrators involves establishing and maintaining standards for ethical behavior by employees. In an era
in which public distrust about government and public officials are at all-time highs, public administration ethics
serve as reminders that officials’ decisions and actions should be based on the principle of serving the public
rather than themselves.
The administrators of the public services should be more responsible, because their work has many
aspects, which can lead to the abuse of the public interest and to corruption. The way of bringing the public
administration must define objectivity, confidentiality, transparency, respect, responsibility, care and honesty.
In some cases, the political environment is really a determining factor that influences the understanding of
ethics in the public services, by providing a general picture for the public services. Various legislation and
regulations have played an important role and have influenced the behavior of the officials, when they should
make impartial decisions. The implementation of the code of ethics in public administration is considered
important. For some, the implementations of the code of ethics in the public administration is on a low level
because they think that the political changes are with a particular importance. The lack of specialized staff or
a special office for the prosecution of the ethical issues in the administration is not in accordance with the
Code of Good Practice. The key point for the improvement of ethical issues is the implementation of ethics
across the wide spectrum of local government, as well as the central criteria must be set to ensure the
continuation of the administration regardless of which political force comes to power. The public administration
must provide programs for the administrative ethics, which must help in forming new quality administrators.

REFERENCES:
Brillantes, Jr., Alex B and Fernandez, Maricel T. Restoring Trust and Building Integrity in Government: Issues
and Concerns in the Philippines and Areas for Reform, International Public Management Review Vol. 12, Iss.
2, 2011

Diokno, Benjamin. 2000. "The Challenges of Embracing Good Governance in the Philippine Public Sector."
Speech delivered at the Pre-Consultative Group - Workshop on Economic and Corporate Governance,
Manila, June 5.

Hall, S. (2017). What are Public Administration Ethics. Retrieved from https://bizfluent.com/info-8014104-
public-administration-ethics.html

National Statistical Coordinating Board, Civil Service Commission Conducts Report Card Survey for Anti-Red
Tape Act (ARTA), NCSB PR-201003-PP1-02, Posted 19 April 2010 Philippine Business Registry,
http://business.gov.ph/web/guest;jsessionid=5cf97bace4538cf23513c
c63773f, August 8, 2012

Office of the Ombudsman of the Philippines. Retrieved from http://www.ombudsman-phil.net

World Bank (2001). Combating Corruption in the Philippines: An Update. Report No. 23687-PH