DPA 704 Administrative Ethics and Public Service

15 QUESTIONS
1. Ethics or moral philosophy concerns on matters of value, of what is
right and wrong behavior towards self and our interactions with the
others. Differentiate public sector ethics from government ethics.
Does ethics important in private (business) sector? Why?

● definition of ethics
● elaborate/expound through examples

Ethics is the study of morality and how it applies to human behavior. It is concerned with what is right
and wrong, good and bad, and what actions are acceptable and unacceptable in various contexts.

Public sector ethics and government ethics are related but distinct concepts. Public sector ethics refers
to the ethical standards that govern the behavior of individuals and organizations operating in the public
sector, such as government agencies, public institutions, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). It
involves principles such as transparency, accountability, and responsibility in carrying out public duties
and services.

Here are some actual cases in the Philippines that pertain to public sector ethics:

(1) The Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) Scandal - This scandal involved the alleged misuse
of government funds by some public officials, including members of Congress, through the allocation of
PDAF or pork barrel funds to fake NGOs. The scandal led to a public outcry and triggered calls for greater
transparency and accountability in government.

(2) The Dengvaxia Controversy - This controversy involved the government's mass vaccination program
for the dengue virus using the Dengvaxia vaccine. The controversy stemmed from allegations of
irregularities in the procurement and administration of the vaccine, as well as concerns over its safety
and efficacy. The controversy highlighted the need for transparency, accountability, and ethical
standards in the conduct of government health programs.

(3) The Boracay Rehabilitation Program - The Boracay Rehabilitation Program was a government
initiative aimed at addressing environmental issues in the popular tourist destination of Boracay. The
program involved the closure of the island for six months to allow for cleanup and rehabilitation. The
program demonstrated the importance of responsible governance and ethical behavior in promoting
sustainable tourism and environmental protection.

(4) Mamasapano Incident - The Mamasapano incident was a tragic event that occurred in 2015, where
44 police commandos were killed in a botched anti-terror operation in Mindanao. The incident raised
questions about the accountability and responsibility of government officials involved in the operation,
including the President, who was criticized for his handling of the situation
On the other hand, government ethics specifically refers to the ethical standards and codes of conduct
that apply to government officials and employees. It includes rules and regulations that govern behavior,
conflicts of interest, and use of government resources.

There have been several actual cases in the Philippines that relate to government ethics and the ethical
standards and codes of conduct that apply to government officials and employees. Here are a few
examples:

(1) Dismissal of Assistant Secretary Moslemen Macarambon Sr. – In 2018, Assistant Secretary Moslemen
Macarambon Sr. was dismissed from the Department of Justice (DOJ) for allegedly intervening in a case
involving a friend. He was accused of using his position to influence the outcome of the case in favor of
his friend, which is a violation of government ethics.

(2) Ombudsman's dismissal of former Mayor Junjun Binay – In 2018, the Office of the Ombudsman
dismissed former Makati Mayor Junjun Binay from office due to serious dishonesty and grave
misconduct. Binay was found to have committed unethical acts in relation to the construction of the
Makati City Hall parking building, including overpricing and awarding contracts to a company owned by
his friend and business associate.

(3) Resignation of Undersecretary Eliseo Rio Jr. – In 2020, Undersecretary Eliseo Rio Jr. of the
Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) resigned from his position due to
ethical concerns. He expressed his disappointment with the DICT leadership's decision to award a
multibillion-peso project to a foreign company without proper bidding and despite his objections.

(4) PhilHealth corruption scandal - In 2020, allegations of corruption and fraudulent activities within the
Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth) surfaced. This led to investigations and calls for
reform in the agency.

These cases demonstrate the importance of government ethics and the need for adherence to ethical
standards and codes of conduct by government officials and employees. They also highlight the need for
transparency, accountability, and responsibility in carrying out public duties and services

While ethics is often associated with the public sector and government, it is also important in the private
sector, particularly in the business world. Business ethics refers to the application of ethical principles
and moral values in the conduct of business activities. It involves issues such as corporate social
responsibility, sustainability, fair labor practices, and ethical marketing.

Ethics is important in the private sector because it promotes trust and confidence in business
relationships, and helps to ensure that businesses operate in a responsible and sustainable manner. It
also helps to prevent fraud, corruption, and other unethical behavior that can harm both the business
and society as a whole.

.
 2. There are four (4) dimensions of ethics, namely: meta-ethics,
normative ethics, descriptive ethics and applied ethics. Cite an ethical
issue on the war against drug of the present administration and apply
aforementioned for (4) dimensions of ethics with brief explanations.

One ethical issue in the war against drugs of the present administration is the use of extrajudicial killings
in the drug war. The four dimensions of ethics can be applied to this issue as follows:

Meta-ethics: This dimension of ethics deals with the nature of ethical principles and the foundation of
ethical values. In the case of the drug war, the meta-ethical question is whether killing suspected drug
offenders without due process is morally justifiable. This raises the issue of the value of human life and
the legitimacy of state violence.

Normative ethics: This dimension of ethics concerns the development and evaluation of ethical norms
and standards. In the case of the drug war, the normative ethical question is whether extrajudicial
killings are consistent with ethical standards such as the respect for human rights and the rule of law. It
also raises the issue of the role of the state in promoting public safety and welfare, and whether this can
justify the use of violence.

Descriptive ethics: This dimension of ethics involves the study of actual moral practices and beliefs in
society. In the case of the drug war, the descriptive ethical question is how people perceive and justify
the use of extrajudicial killings in the drug war. It also raises the issue of the social, economic, and
political factors that contribute to the drug problem and the use of violence as a means to address it.

Applied ethics: This dimension of ethics deals with the practical application of ethical principles to real-
life situations. In the case of the drug war, the applied ethical question is what actions can be taken to
address the drug problem without resorting to extrajudicial killings. This involves considerations such as
drug prevention and rehabilitation programs, law enforcement and judicial reform, and international
cooperation in addressing the global drug problem.

In conclusion, the issue of extrajudicial killings in the drug war of the present administration raises
important ethical questions that cut across the different dimensions of ethics. It requires a thoughtful
and critical analysis of the ethical values and principles involved, as well as the social and political
context in which the drug problem exists.

3. As public servant, we should strictly adhere to the Code of Conduct

and Ethical Standard as embodied under RA 6713. Cite at least two
(2) of this code that are commonly violated by some elected officials
and briefly explain how and why it is violated?

As public servants, it is our duty to uphold the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials
and Employees (RA 6713). Unfortunately, some elected officials have been known to violate some of the
provisions of this code. Two of the most commonly violated provisions are as follows:
(1) Conflict of Interest - Public officials are prohibited from having any direct or indirect financial or
material interest in any transaction that is related to their official duties. This means that they cannot
use their position to benefit themselves, their relatives, or their friends. However, some elected officials
have been known to violate this provision by using their position to promote their personal or business
interests. For example, an elected official may push for the approval of a project that would benefit a
company that they own or have a stake in, even if it is not in the best interest of the public.

One example of a conflict of interest case in the Philippines involves former Department of Tourism
(DOT) Secretary Wanda Teo. In 2018, it was revealed that the DOT had paid Php 60 million to Bitag
Media Unlimited, a production company owned by Teo's brother, Ben Tulfo. The payment was for
advertisements that aired on Tulfo's show, despite the fact that the show did not have a significant
viewership in the target market. This raised questions about the conflict of interest between Teo's
position as DOT Secretary and her brother's business interests.

Another example involves former Philippine National Police (PNP) Chief Alan Purisima. In 2015, Purisima
was found to have violated the conflict of interest rule when he ordered a suspended PNP contract to be
implemented through a courier service owned by his close friend. This violated the Government
Procurement Reform Act, which prohibits public officials from influencing the awarding of government
contracts to benefit themselves or their associates.

These cases highlight the importance of avoiding conflicts of interest in public service to ensure that
government officials act in the best interest of the public and not for their personal gain or interests.

(2) Solicitation or Acceptance of Gifts - Public officials are prohibited from soliciting or accepting gifts,
whether in cash or in kind, from any person or entity that is directly or indirectly involved in any
transaction that is related to their official duties. This is to prevent public officials from being influenced
by gifts and favors in the performance of their duties. However, some elected officials have been known
to violate this provision by accepting gifts from lobbyists, contractors, or other entities that have
business dealings with the government. This can create a conflict of interest and compromise the
integrity of the public official.

One actual case in the Philippines related to the solicitation or acceptance of gifts by public officials is
the "GCTA for sale" scandal that came to light in 2019. It involved the Bureau of Corrections (BuCor)
officials allegedly accepting bribes from inmates or their families in exchange for reducing their prison
terms through the Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) law. Several officials, including the BuCor chief
and some senators, were implicated in the scandal.

Another case is the controversy surrounding the lavish wedding of former mayor Jed Mabilog of Iloilo
City in 2017. It was alleged that Mabilog received expensive gifts, including a luxury SUV, from suspected
drug lord Melvin Odicta Sr. This raised questions about Mabilog's possible connections to the illegal drug
trade and his suitability to hold public office.

These provisions are often violated because of the temptation of personal gain and the lack of
accountability. Some elected officials may prioritize their own interests over the public interest, and may
use their power and influence to enrich themselves or their associates. In some cases, there may also be
a lack of transparency and oversight, which can make it easier for public officials to engage in unethical
behavior.

In conclusion, it is important for public officials to strictly adhere to the Code of Conduct and Ethical
Standards for Public Officials and Employees. Violations of this code can undermine public trust and
confidence in government institutions, and can have serious consequences for the well-being of society
as a whole. It is important for elected officials to prioritize the public interest over their own personal
interests, and to act with integrity and transparency in the performance of their duties.

4. Public officials and employees shall always be accountable to the

people and accountability is equated with ethics and good
governance. Explain briefly the importance of accountability in good
governance and cite some acts/examples of accountability as public
official.

Accountability is a crucial aspect of good governance, and it is closely linked to ethics and transparency.
Accountability means that public officials and employees are responsible for their actions and decisions,
and are answerable to the people they serve. It is important in good governance because it promotes
trust, legitimacy, and effectiveness in government, and helps to prevent corruption, abuse of power, and
other forms of unethical behavior.

Some acts/examples of accountability as a public official include:

Reporting and disclosure - Public officials are required to report on their activities, decisions, and
finances, and to disclose any conflicts of interest or potential ethical violations. This can include filing
regular financial disclosures, providing public access to government records and documents, and
responding to requests for information from the public and the media.

There are several cases in the Philippines where reporting and disclosure have played a crucial role in
promoting good governance and accountability. Here are some examples:

The PDAF scam - In 2013, the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) scam was uncovered, where
lawmakers were found to have misused their pork barrel funds for personal gain. The investigation was
sparked by a report from the Commission on Audit (COA), which disclosed the irregularities in the use of
PDAF. This led to a public outcry and eventually resulted in the abolition of the PDAF system.

The Dengvaxia controversy - In 2017, a controversy erupted over the use of the Dengvaxia vaccine in the
Philippines, which was found to have caused several deaths. The issue was brought to light by the
media, which had access to government documents and reports that showed irregularities in the
procurement and distribution of the vaccine. This led to investigations by various government agencies
and eventually resulted in the filing of charges against former government officials and executives of the
vaccine manufacturer.

The SALN controversy - In 2012, the impeachment trial of former Chief Justice Renato Corona was
triggered by a controversy over his Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN). The issue
was raised by a report from the Ombudsman, which disclosed inconsistencies and omissions in Corona's
SALN. This led to a public outcry and eventually resulted in Corona's impeachment and removal from
office.

These cases demonstrate the importance of reporting and disclosure in promoting good governance and
accountability. Without access to government records and documents, it would have been difficult to
uncover the irregularities and abuses of power in these cases. By requiring public officials to report on
their activities, decisions, and finances, and by providing public access to government records and
documents, we can promote transparency, integrity, and accountability in government.

Oversight and enforcement - Public officials are subject to oversight and enforcement mechanisms that
ensure they are held accountable for their actions. This can include internal audits, investigations, and
disciplinary procedures, as well as external oversight from independent agencies, courts, and the media.

There are several cases in the Philippines where oversight and enforcement mechanisms have played a
crucial role in promoting good governance and accountability. Here are some examples:

The Pork Barrel Scam - In 2013, the scandal over the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) or
"pork barrel" scam came to light. The scam involved the embezzlement of public funds allocated to
lawmakers for development projects. The scam was uncovered by the Commission on Audit (COA) and
the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), and it led to the filing of charges against several lawmakers
and government officials.

The Mamasapano Incident - In 2015, the Mamasapano incident, where 44 members of the Philippine
National Police Special Action Force were killed in an encounter with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front
(MILF), led to a public outcry and demands for accountability. The incident was investigated by the
Senate and the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), and it resulted in the filing of charges against
several officials, including former President Benigno Aquino III.

The Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) Controversy - In 2014, the Supreme Court declared the
Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) as unconstitutional. The DAP was a stimulus program that
allowed the realignment of unused government funds to priority projects. The controversy over the DAP
was brought to light by a group of lawmakers who questioned the legality of the program. The issue was
investigated by the Senate and the House of Representatives, and it eventually led to the filing of
charges against several officials, including former Budget Secretary Florencio Abad.

These cases demonstrate the importance of oversight and enforcement mechanisms in promoting good
governance and accountability. By holding public officials accountable for their actions, we can prevent
abuses of power and corruption, and promote transparency and integrity in government. The
independent agencies, courts, and the media have played a critical role in ensuring that public officials
are held accountable for their actions.
Consultation and participation - Public officials are expected to consult and engage with the public,
stakeholders, and civil society organizations in decision-making processes. This can include holding
public hearings, conducting surveys, and soliciting feedback from affected communities.

Consultation and participation are essential components of good governance. Here are some actual
cases in the Philippines where consultation and participation have played a vital role in promoting good
governance:

The People's Initiative Against Pork Barrel - In 2013, the People's Initiative Against Pork Barrel, a
coalition of civil society organizations, launched a campaign to abolish the Priority Development
Assistance Fund (PDAF) or "pork barrel." The campaign involved a signature campaign, a series of public
hearings, and a massive rally at the Luneta Park in Manila. The initiative eventually led to the Supreme
Court's declaration of the PDAF as unconstitutional.

The Anti-Mining Campaign in Palawan - In 2011, civil society organizations and community groups in
Palawan launched a campaign against large-scale mining operations in the province. The campaign
involved a series of public consultations, forums, and peaceful protests. The initiative eventually led to
the passage of an ordinance that banned large-scale mining operations in the province.

The National Greening Program - The National Greening Program (NGP) is a government-led initiative to
plant 1.5 billion trees in 1.5 million hectares of forest land from 2011 to 2016. The NGP involves the
participation of local communities, civil society organizations, and the private sector in reforestation
efforts. The program has led to the creation of livelihood opportunities for local communities and the
protection of biodiversity in forested areas.

These cases demonstrate the importance of consultation and participation in decision-making

processes. By engaging with the public, stakeholders, and civil society organizations, public officials can
ensure that their policies and programs are responsive to the needs and concerns of affected
communities. Consultation and participation can also help build trust and legitimacy in government and
promote social cohesion and inclusivity.

Performance evaluation - Public officials are evaluated on their performance and effectiveness in
delivering public services and achieving policy objectives. This can include setting performance targets
and indicators, monitoring and evaluating outcomes, and conducting regular performance reviews.

Performance evaluation is a crucial component of good governance. Here are some actual cases in the
Philippines where performance evaluation has played a vital role in promoting good governance:

The Bottom-Up Budgeting (BUB) Program - The BUB program is a government initiative that aims to
promote participatory budgeting and ensure that public funds are allocated to projects that address the
needs of the poorest and most marginalized communities. The program involves a performance-based
approach, where local governments are evaluated based on their ability to implement development
projects that meet the criteria set by the national government.

The Performance-Based Bonus (PBB) System - The PBB system is a government program that provides
bonuses to public servants based on their performance and contributions to the achievement of agency
targets and objectives. The program encourages public officials to be more accountable and efficient in
delivering public services and promotes a culture of performance excellence in the public sector.

The Ease of Doing Business Act - The Ease of Doing Business Act is a law that aims to streamline
bureaucratic processes and improve the delivery of government services to businesses. The law
mandates the creation of a performance evaluation system that measures the efficiency and
effectiveness of government agencies in providing business-related services.

These cases demonstrate the importance of performance evaluation in promoting good governance. By
setting clear targets and indicators, monitoring outcomes, and conducting regular performance reviews,
public officials can ensure that they are delivering public services effectively and efficiently. Performance
evaluation can also help identify areas for improvement and encourage a culture of continuous learning
and innovation in the public sector.

These acts of accountability demonstrate the importance of transparency, integrity, and responsiveness
in public service. They help to ensure that public officials are held to high ethical standards, and that
they act in the best interests of the public. By promoting accountability in governance, we can
strengthen democracy, promote social justice, and improve the lives of all citizens.

5. The national election 2022 has just concluded and barangay election
is on its preparation stage. Some hopefuls are now wooing to Juan
and Juana for their votes. Applying your knowledge in public
administration, what advise can you give to our “kababayan” in
choosing a right and ethical leader?

a. Look for a candidate with a track record of public service and good governance. Look for those
who have a history of putting the public interest first and have shown integrity and ethical behavior
in their previous positions.

There are many cases in the Philippines where looking for a candidate with a track record of public
service and good governance has become relevant in the barangay level. Here are some examples:

In 2018, a barangay captain in Bacoor, Cavite was suspended by the Ombudsman for grave misconduct,
dishonesty, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service. The barangay captain was found
to have used his position to benefit his family and close associates, and was even caught on video
receiving bribes. This case highlights the importance of choosing a candidate who has a proven track
record of ethical behavior and putting the public interest first.

In 2019, a barangay chairman in Quezon City was recognized by the city government for his outstanding
performance in implementing various community programs and initiatives. The chairman was
commended for his dedication to public service and his efforts to improve the lives of his constituents.
This case shows the importance of looking for a candidate with a track record of public service and good
governance, as they are more likely to be effective and dedicated leaders.
In 2021, a barangay captain in Davao City was commended by the city government for his honesty and
integrity in returning a lost wallet containing a large sum of money. The barangay captain's act of
honesty and integrity earned him the respect and trust of his constituents, and shows the importance of
choosing a candidate who has a history of ethical behavior and putting the public interest first.

b. Evaluate the candidate's platform and agenda. A candidate's platform should focus on addressing
the needs and concerns of the community and should prioritize ethical and responsible governance.

One example of a barangay case in the Philippines where evaluating a candidate's platform and agenda
became relevant is the Barangay Elections in 2018 in Quezon City. One of the candidates for Barangay
Chairman, Rosalino Gonzales, presented a platform that focused on improving the delivery of basic
services to the community, such as health services, waste management, and security. He also
emphasized the need for transparency and accountability in the barangay government and pledged to
establish a system for public participation in decision-making processes. Gonzales was elected and was
able to implement some of his proposed programs and initiatives during his term, earning the trust and
support of the community. His platform and agenda served as a guide for his governance, which
prioritized ethical and responsible leadership.

c. Check the candidate's background and affiliations. It is important to research and be aware of any
potential conflicts of interest or affiliations that may compromise the candidate's ability to act in the
public interest.

One example of a barangay case in the Philippines where checking the candidate's background and
affiliations became relevant is the Barangay Elections of 2018 in Pasay City. In this case, several
candidates were discovered to have affiliations with criminal gangs and were also found to have pending
criminal cases. The discovery of these affiliations and cases prompted the Commission on Elections to
disqualify these candidates from running in the elections, as they were deemed unfit to hold public
office and were not expected to prioritize the public interest in their governance. This example shows
the importance of checking the background and affiliations of candidates to ensure that they have the
integrity and ethical behavior necessary to govern in the best interest of the community.

d. Attend candidate forums and debates. These events provide an opportunity to hear directly from
the candidates and evaluate their ability to communicate effectively and articulate their positions
clearly.

One example of attending candidate forums and debates in choosing barangay officials was during the
2018 barangay elections in San Juan City. The local Commission on Elections (COMELEC) organized a
forum where candidates were given the chance to introduce themselves, present their platforms and
answer questions from the audience. This event allowed the voters to evaluate the candidates' ability to
communicate their plans and ideas effectively, as well as their knowledge and understanding of the
issues affecting the community. The forum also provided an opportunity for voters to engage with the
candidates and clarify any concerns or questions they may have had before making their decision.
 e. Consider the candidate's character and values. Look for those who display qualities such as
honesty, humility, and empathy towards others.

One example of considering a candidate's character and values is in Barangay Mabini in Davao City. In
the 2018 Barangay Elections, a candidate named Jojo Villanueva ran for barangay captain. He was
known for his honesty and dedication to public service, having previously served as a barangay
councilor. Despite being the underdog in the race, he won the election by a wide margin, thanks in part
to his reputation for integrity and his commitment to putting the needs of the community first. His
supporters noted that he was always approachable and willing to listen to the concerns of his
constituents, and he was seen as a role model for ethical and responsible governance in the barangay.

Ultimately, it is important to exercise our right to vote and choose leaders who demonstrate a
commitment to public service, ethical behavior, and good governance.

6. There are few ethical standards to mention. Name at least two (2)
and briefly explain why there are important virtues to practice in our
dealings with everyday lives.

Four important virtues to practice in our dealings with everyday life are:

Honesty - being truthful and transparent in our words and actions, even if it may not be easy or
convenient.

Example scenario: A cashier accidentally gives you extra change, but you notice the mistake. Practicing
honesty would mean returning the excess amount and informing the cashier of the mistake.

Respect - treating others with dignity, regardless of differences in beliefs, opinions, or backgrounds.

Example scenario: You may have a different political or religious belief than your friend, but practicing
respect means acknowledging their perspective and engaging in a civil conversation without resorting to
insults or aggression.

Compassion - showing kindness and understanding towards others, especially those who are
experiencing difficulties or challenges.

Example scenario: A friend is going through a tough time with a family member's illness. Practicing
compassion would mean offering emotional support, listening attentively, and helping out in any way
possible.

Responsibility - being accountable for our actions and decisions, and fulfilling our duties and obligations.

Example scenario: You were assigned a group project for school or work, and practicing responsibility
would mean doing your fair share of the work, meeting deadlines, and communicating effectively with
your group members.
 7. Why administrative ethics important? Do you agree that our
government leaders must strictly adhere to these? Why and why not?

Administrative ethics is important because it ensures that government officials and employees
behave in a manner that upholds the public trust, promotes fairness, transparency, and
accountability, and serves the common good. It sets standards for ethical conduct, integrity, and
professionalism in the workplace, and provides guidelines for managing conflicts of interest,
avoiding corruption, and promoting good governance.

I agree that our government leaders must strictly adhere to administrative ethics. When our leaders
follow ethical standards, they are better able to serve the public interest, make decisions that are
fair and impartial, and manage public resources effectively. This builds public trust and confidence in
the government, which is essential for the success of a democracy.

One example of a case where strict adherence to administrative ethics is crucial is the ongoing
investigation into alleged corruption within the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth).
The accusations involve high-ranking officials who are accused of manipulating the agency's funds for
personal gain, resulting in the failure to provide adequate healthcare services to the public. If these
officials had followed ethical standards and codes of conduct, they would have been more focused on
serving the public interest and ensuring that public resources were used for their intended purpose.

Another example is the case of the 2015 Mamasapano massacre in Maguindanao, where the Philippine
National Police-Special Action Force (PNP-SAF) was involved in a clash with Muslim rebels that resulted
in the deaths of 44 police officers. The incident was marred with issues related to accountability,
transparency, and ethical behavior of the involved officials. A thorough investigation and strict
adherence to administrative ethics could have helped prevent such a tragic loss of life and prevent a
further breakdown of trust between the government and its citizens.

In both cases, strict adherence to administrative ethics could have prevented the misuse of public
resources and could have ensured accountability and transparency in government actions. By upholding
ethical standards, government officials can build trust and confidence with the public, which is essential
for effective governance and the success of a democracy.

On the other hand, when government leaders do not adhere to administrative ethics, it can lead to
abuse of power, corruption, and unethical behavior that undermines the public trust and confidence
in government. This can result in negative consequences for society, including reduced economic
growth, social inequality, and a breakdown of the rule of law.

An example is the infamous "tanim-bala" or bullet-planting scam that victimized travelers at the Ninoy
Aquino International Airport (NAIA). In 2015, reports emerged that airport personnel were planting
bullets in the luggage of passengers, then extorting money from them in exchange for dropping the
charges. The scandal tarnished the reputation of the airport and the government's ability to provide safe
and reliable transportation services. It also exposed the corrupt practices of some government officials
and their lack of regard for the welfare and rights of ordinary citizens.

Another case is the Mamasapano massacre, where 44 members of the Philippine National Police-Special
Action Force (PNP-SAF) were killed in a botched anti-terror operation in January 2015. The incident
raised questions about the competence and ethics of the government officials involved, including then-
President Benigno Aquino III. Critics accused Aquino of bypassing standard operating procedures and
not providing sufficient support to the PNP-SAF, leading to the disastrous outcome. The incident eroded
public trust and confidence in the government and raised concerns about the rule of law in the country.

Therefore, it is essential that government leaders understand the importance of administrative

ethics and make a commitment to follow ethical standards in their conduct of public affairs. This will
help to promote good governance, uphold the public trust, and ensure that our democratic
institutions remain strong and effective.

8. Another positive outcome of administrative ethics is the timely and

informative communication with the community through transparency.
Briefly explain how transparency work on a certain government
organization or on your present field of work.

The Ormoc City Manpower Center is a government agency in the Philippines that is responsible
for managing and overseeing the employment and training programs of the local government
unit of Ormoc City. It aims to provide employment opportunities for the residents of Ormoc City,
as well as promote skills development and improve the quality of the local workforce. The center
also provides assistance and support to job seekers, employers, and other stakeholders in the
local labor market.

Timely and informative communication with the community through transparency by the Ormoc
City Manpower Center is important because it builds trust and credibility with the public. By
providing transparent and timely information, the Manpower Center is able to demonstrate
accountability and responsibility in its operations, programs, and services. This can help to
prevent misunderstandings, misinformation, and confusion among the public, and allows for the
community to be fully informed and engaged in the services offered by the center. Additionally,
transparency can promote community participation and feedback, which can help the center to
improve its services and programs to better meet the needs of the community. Overall, timely
and informative communication through transparency is crucial for ensuring effective and
efficient service delivery and fostering a positive relationship between the Manpower Center and
the community it serves.
The Manpower Center in Ormoc City, Philippines practices transparency by providing timely and
informative communication with the community. The center regularly updates its website and social
media accounts to inform the public about its programs, services, and activities. It also conducts regular
consultations and feedback mechanisms with stakeholders to ensure that their needs are being met and
that their concerns are being addressed. Additionally, the center makes its financial and operational
reports available to the public to promote accountability and to build trust and confidence in its
operations. Through these efforts, the Manpower Center in Ormoc City demonstrates the importance of
transparency in promoting good governance and effective public service delivery.

Transparency in a community-based multipurpose cooperative involves open

communication and disclosure of information to its members. This includes providing
regular reports on financial transactions, investments, and other relevant activities of the
cooperative. Members have the right to access these reports and ask questions or raise
concerns during regular meetings.

For example, a cooperative in a rural area may have regular meetings with members
where financial statements are presented and discussed. Members are encouraged to
ask questions or provide feedback to ensure that the cooperative is being run in a
transparent and accountable manner. This helps build trust among members and
ensures that the cooperative is working towards meeting their needs and interests.

9. What is administrative discretion? How important it is on your

respective department? Can it be a source of abuse? Why and why
not?

Administrative discretion refers to the decision-making power given to administrative officials to

interpret and apply laws and regulations in a way that aligns with their agency's goals and objectives.

As an organizational development officer in the Ormoc City Manpower Center, there are various
situations where administrative discretion may be important. For example, when

a) deciding on the allocation of resources,

As an organizational development officer in the Ormoc City Manpower Center, there may be situations
where administrative discretion is important in deciding on the allocation of resources. Here are some
actual scenarios:

In the case of limited funding for training programs, the organizational development officer may need to
use administrative discretion to determine which programs to prioritize. For example, if there is a high
demand for computer skills training among the local workforce, the officer may decide to allocate more
resources to that program.

When hiring staff for the Manpower Center, the organizational development officer may need to
exercise administrative discretion in deciding on the qualifications required for the position. For
instance, the officer may prioritize candidates who have experience in community development and
have a track record of working effectively with local government agencies.

In the case of limited office space, the organizational development officer may need to use
administrative discretion in determining which departments or staff members should be allocated more
space. For instance, if a particular department requires more space to accommodate the training needs
of a larger number of clients, the officer may decide to allocate more space to that department.

In all of these scenarios, administrative discretion is important to ensure that resources are allocated
effectively and efficiently, and that the needs of the local community are being addressed. However,
administrative discretion can also be a source of abuse if it is not exercised with transparency,
accountability, and ethical considerations.

b) developing policies and procedures, or

As an organizational development officer in the Ormoc City Manpower Center, developing policies and
procedures may be important in various scenarios. Here are some examples:

Implementing a new training program: As an organizational development officer, you may need to
develop policies and procedures for a new training program that the center wants to implement. This
can involve determining the program's objectives, outlining the training modules, identifying the target
participants, defining the trainers' roles and responsibilities, establishing evaluation criteria, and setting
up a feedback mechanism.

Managing employee performance: In order to ensure that the center's employees are performing at
their best, you may need to develop policies and procedures for employee performance management.
This can involve establishing clear performance objectives, conducting regular performance evaluations,
identifying training and development needs, and implementing a system of rewards and recognition.

Handling grievances and complaints: In the event of grievances or complaints from employees or clients,
you may need to develop policies and procedures for addressing these issues. This can involve
establishing a formal grievance procedure, identifying the individuals responsible for handling
complaints, establishing timelines for resolving complaints, and implementing a system of
communication to keep all parties informed of the status of their complaints.

Managing budget and financial resources: As an organizational development officer, you may be
responsible for managing the center's budget and financial resources. In this case, you will need to
develop policies and procedures for budgeting, financial reporting, procurement, and resource
allocation. This can involve developing a budget plan, monitoring expenditures, ensuring compliance
with financial regulations, and optimizing resource allocation to achieve the center's goals.
Overall, developing policies and procedures is important for maintaining organizational effectiveness
and ensuring that the center's operations are conducted in an ethical, transparent, and consistent
manner.

c) handling personnel matters.

As an organizational development officer in the Ormoc City Manpower Center, handling personnel
matters may be important in the following scenarios:

Performance Evaluation: As an organizational development officer, you may need to conduct regular
performance evaluations of employees to identify areas where they need improvement and provide
support to help them achieve their goals. This may involve developing performance metrics, conducting
evaluations, and providing feedback and coaching to employees.

Hiring Process: The hiring process is critical to the success of any organization, and as an organizational
development officer, you may be responsible for overseeing the recruitment and selection process. This
includes developing job descriptions, advertising vacancies, screening resumes, interviewing candidates,
and making job offers.

Employee Relations: As an organizational development officer, you may be responsible for handling
employee relations issues such as conflicts, grievances, and complaints. This involves investigating
complaints, providing mediation and conflict resolution services, and working with managers to develop
solutions to improve employee relations.

Training and Development: As an organizational development officer, you may be responsible for
developing and implementing training and development programs to enhance employee skills and
knowledge. This may involve conducting needs assessments, developing training materials, delivering
training sessions, and evaluating the effectiveness of training programs.

In terms of the importance of administrative discretion to the department, it can play a crucial role in
achieving organizational goals and responding to the needs of the community. By allowing officials to
exercise discretion, they can tailor their decisions to the unique circumstances of each situation, rather
than relying on a one-size-fits-all approach.

However, administrative discretion can also be a source of abuse if not properly monitored and
regulated. When officials are given too much discretion, they may be more prone to making biased or
discriminatory decisions, or engaging in corrupt practices such as favoritism, nepotism, and bribery.
Therefore, it is important to have checks and balances in place to ensure that administrative discretion is
used responsibly and in the best interest of the public.

As an organizational development officer, it is important to understand the scope of administrative

discretion and work to create a culture of transparency and accountability within the department. This
includes establishing clear guidelines and procedures for decision-making, providing training and
support to staff, and regularly monitoring and evaluating the use of administrative discretion to ensure
that it is being used fairly and ethically.

10. Most common unethical behavior of a government employee is

corruption. Kindly enumerate an explain some causes and impact of
corruption in the government.

Corruption is a pervasive problem in the Philippine government, with serious negative consequences for
the country's economic, political, and social development. Here are some actual causes and impacts of
corruption:

Causes:

Low salaries and inadequate benefits of government employees

There have been several cases in the Philippines where low salaries and inadequate benefits of
government employees have been cited as reasons for corruption. Here are a few examples:

The "laglag-bala" scam at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) in Manila. In 2015, airport
personnel were caught planting bullets in the luggage of passengers, and then extorting money from
them in exchange for dropping the charges. Some employees claimed that they resorted to this illegal
practice because their salaries were not enough to support their families.

The "ghost employees" scam in the province of Masbate. In 2019, the Commission on Audit (COA)
discovered that several government employees were listed as regular employees even though they did
not exist or did not report for work. The COA report suggested that this was done to divert their salaries
to the pockets of corrupt officials and their cohorts, who would then share the money among
themselves.

The misuse of the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), also known as "pork barrel," by some
members of Congress. In 2013, several lawmakers were implicated in a scandal involving the misuse of
their PDAF allocations. They were accused of channeling the funds to fake non-government
organizations (NGOs) that they themselves had set up, and then receiving kickbacks from the supposed
projects. Some of them claimed that they did this because their salaries as legislators were not enough
to finance their pet projects and campaign expenses.

These cases demonstrate how low salaries and inadequate benefits can create opportunities for
corruption, as some government employees and officials resort to illegal activities to supplement their
income. This not only violates ethical standards and undermines public trust in government, but it also
diverts public resources away from their intended beneficiaries and towards the pockets of corrupt
individuals.
Lack of accountability and transparency in government processes

Another example is the corruption scandal involving the Bureau of Customs (BOC) in 2017. The
controversy involved the alleged smuggling of billions of pesos worth of drugs and other contraband
into the country through the BOC. The scandal was able to happen because of the lack of accountability
among BOC officials, including alleged collusion with smugglers.

Another example is the alleged irregularities in the procurement of medical supplies and equipment
during the COVID-19 pandemic. Reports suggest that some officials took advantage of the situation to
award contracts to favored suppliers, some of which were overpriced and substandard. This lack of
transparency and accountability allowed for the misuse of public funds and put the lives of Filipinos at
risk.

Another example is the controversial contract between the Department of Health (DOH) and the
pharmaceutical company Zuellig Pharma for the purchase of P800 million worth of anti-pneumonia
vaccines in 2012. The deal was questioned by various sectors due to its high cost and lack of
transparency. It was later revealed that the DOH officials involved in the transaction received hefty
commissions from the pharmaceutical company. The lack of accountability and transparency in the
procurement process led to allegations of corruption and eroded public trust in government institutions.

Weak law enforcement and anti-corruption measures

Another example is the "Maguindanao Massacre" in 2009, where 58 people, including journalists and
members of a political clan, were brutally killed in Ampatuan town, Maguindanao. The massacre was
allegedly masterminded by the Ampatuan political clan, who had close ties with the administration at
that time. The clan had a history of using their power and influence to manipulate the justice system and
law enforcement agencies in their favor. The case exposed the weaknesses in the Philippine justice
system and the lack of effective anti-corruption measures to hold powerful individuals accountable for
their actions.

Another example is the issue of red tape and bureaucratic corruption, where government officials
demand bribes or engage in other corrupt activities to speed up or facilitate the processing of
government documents or permits. This is a common problem in the Philippines and has been cited as a
major hindrance to doing business and attracting foreign investment. The lack of effective measures to
address this issue contributes to a culture of impunity and corruption in the country.

Political patronage and nepotism in government appointments

Another example is the "pastillas" scheme in the Bureau of Immigration, where corrupt officials
allegedly facilitated the entry of Chinese nationals into the Philippines in exchange for bribes. The
officials involved were found to have been appointed by individuals with connections to high-ranking
government officials.

One example of political patronage and nepotism in government appointments that led to corruption is
the "ghost employees" scandal in the Philippine Congress. In 2017, it was revealed that several
lawmakers had hired fictitious employees and relatives as staff, allowing them to collect salaries and
other benefits from public funds. This was done to divert the money for personal gain, such as kickbacks
or campaign expenses.

Inadequate governance systems and institutions

example is the Bureau of Customs (BOC) corruption scandal, where officials were involved in the
smuggling of goods and the underdeclaration of values to evade taxes. This resulted in billions of pesos
in lost revenue for the government.

One example of inadequate governance systems and institutions giving rise to corruption is the Priority
Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) or "pork barrel" scam that was uncovered in 2013. This involved
lawmakers allegedly diverting public funds intended for development projects to fake non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) in exchange for kickbacks. The scandal highlighted the weaknesses in the country's
governance systems, including the lack of transparency and accountability in the allocation of public
funds, and the susceptibility of government officials to corruption. The PDAF scam resulted in public
outrage, with mass protests and calls for accountability and reform in the government. Several
lawmakers and officials were implicated and charged with graft and corruption, including high-profile
politicians such as Janet Lim-Napoles and former senators Bong Revilla, Jinggoy Estrada, and Juan Ponce
Enrile. The scandal also prompted the government to implement reforms in the allocation of funds and
anti-corruption measures, such as the abolition of the PDAF system and the creation of the Department
of Budget and Management's online portal for transparency in government spending

Impacts:

Impedes economic growth by reducing investor confidence and discouraging foreign investment

Limits the government's ability to provide essential services, such as healthcare, education, and
infrastructure development

Promotes inequality by favoring the wealthy and powerful over the poor and marginalized

Erodes public trust and confidence in government institutions and undermines the rule of law

Facilitates organized crime, terrorism, and other forms of illicit activity that threaten national security
and stability

It is crucial for the government to address corruption by implementing effective anti-corruption

measures, such as strengthening law enforcement, increasing transparency and accountability, and
promoting ethical behavior among government officials and employees. This requires a sustained effort
and commitment from all stakeholders, including the government, civil society, and the private sector.

11. What is the importance of accountability on good governance?

Accountability is essential in good governance as it promotes transparency, fairness, and responsibility

among government officials and institutions. When public officials are held accountable for their actions,
they are more likely to act in the public's best interest and less likely to engage in corrupt activities. Here
are three actual cases in the Philippines where accountability played an important role in promoting
good governance:

Typhoon Yolanda Relief Operations - After Typhoon Yolanda devastated the Philippines in 2013, the
government received millions of dollars in foreign aid to support relief and rehabilitation efforts.
However, allegations of corruption and mismanagement arose, prompting the government to launch an
investigation and hold officials accountable for their actions. The government's response to the crisis
highlighted the importance of accountability in ensuring that aid is used effectively and efficiently.

Dengvaxia Controversy - In 2017, a controversy erupted over the use of the Dengvaxia vaccine in the
Philippines. It was alleged that the vaccine had caused severe side effects, including deaths, and that it
had been approved for use without proper safety testing. The issue led to widespread public concern
and demands for accountability from government officials, particularly those responsible for the
procurement and administration of the vaccine. This case highlights the importance of accountability in
ensuring that public health policies and programs are grounded in evidence-based research and
prioritize the safety and well-being of citizens.

Manila Bay Rehabilitation Project - The Manila Bay Rehabilitation Project is a government-led initiative
aimed at restoring the ecological balance and improving the water quality of Manila Bay. The project has
faced challenges related to the lack of accountability and transparency in the implementation of the
project. The public has raised concerns about the government's failure to involve stakeholders and the
lack of information regarding the project's budget and timeline. The importance of accountability in the
project was highlighted when the Supreme Court issued a writ of kalikasan, ordering the government to
submit a plan of action for the rehabilitation of Manila Bay.

12. One mode of corruption to both developed and developing

countries is causing loss to government by negligence. Kindly name
another two (2) mode of corruption and briefly explain their negative
impact to the government,

Another mode of corruption is bribery, where public officials receive money or other valuable items in
exchange for favors or services. This can lead to unfair distribution of resources and opportunities, as
well as the distortion of public policies and decision-making processes.

The "Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA) Bribery Scandal" involved the solicitation and
acceptance of bribes by LLDA officials in exchange for the issuance of environmental clearances and
permits. This led to the unchecked proliferation of illegal fishing pens and fish cages in Laguna Lake,
causing environmental degradation and loss of livelihood for legitimate fisherfolk.

Another case involved the Bureau of Immigration scandal, where officials allegedly accepted bribes from
Chinese nationals in exchange for illegally granting them visas and permits. This compromised national
security and sovereignty, as well as facilitated illegal activities such as gambling and human trafficking.
Another case is the alleged bribery scandal involving the Department of Public Works and Highways
(DPWH), where contractors reportedly paid kickbacks to DPWH officials in exchange for contracts and
projects.

A third case is the Bureau of Customs (BOC) corruption scandal, where some officials were found to be
receiving bribes from smugglers in exchange for turning a blind eye to their illegal activities or facilitating
the release of their smuggled goods without proper inspection or taxation.

A third mode of corruption is embezzlement or misappropriation of public funds, where government

officials steal or divert public funds for personal gain. This can lead to a lack of resources for public
services and infrastructure, as well as social inequality and poverty.

An example is the case of former Philippine National Police (PNP) Chief Alan Purisima, who was charged
with graft and corruption for his involvement in the anomalous Werfast firearms deal. The deal involved
the procurement of firearms licenses and permits for PNP personnel through a courier service owned by
Purisima's close associates, without proper bidding and documentation. This resulted in a loss of public
funds and a lack of accountability and transparency in government procurement processes.

Another case of embezzlement is the Malampaya Fund scam. The Malampaya Fund is a special fund
intended for energy-related projects and programs. It was discovered that several government officials,
including former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, misused the funds amounting to billions of pesos.
The funds were allegedly used for political purposes, including Arroyo's election campaign. This scandal
also sparked public outcry and led to calls for accountability.

Another actual case of corruption in the Philippines involving embezzlement is the plunder case against
former Philippine president Joseph Estrada. In 2001, Estrada was accused of amassing over 4 billion
pesos in public funds through kickbacks, illegal gambling operations, and other corrupt activities during
his presidency. The case led to Estrada's impeachment and subsequent arrest, and he was later found
guilty of plunder and sentenced to life imprisonment.

All forms of corruption undermine good governance, distort the rule of law, and erode public trust and
confidence in government institutions.

13. Past and present administration recognized that the

government is shadowed with unethical issues. As such actions has
been taken by the past administrations to address these issues.
Name at least two (2) actions taken and briefly explain how it help
resolve, if not, reduce the problem.
Due to recent election of Pres. F. Marcos, and for the purpose of answering the above, I would like to
take the administration of former President R. Duterte as PRESENT and those administration before him
as PAST.

As for unethical issues in the past, there have been numerous instances of corruption and abuse of
power by government officials in the Philippines. Here are some examples:

The "Pork Barrel Scandal" - This involved the misuse of government funds meant for development
projects by members of Congress. The scandal was exposed in 2013, and several lawmakers were
implicated in the misuse of funds. The present administration under President Duterte has created a
task force to investigate and prosecute those involved in the scandal.

The "Maguindanao Massacre" - This was a politically motivated killing of 58 people, including 32
journalists, in 2009. The main suspect in the case, Andal Ampatuan Jr., was a local politician with close
ties to the administration of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. The present administration has
vowed to bring justice to the victims and has ordered the speedy resolution of the case.

The "Laguna Lake Rehabilitation Scandal" - This involved the misappropriation of funds meant for the
rehabilitation of the Laguna Lake, the largest lake in the Philippines. The present administration under
President Duterte has ordered an investigation into the scandal and has promised to hold those
responsible accountable.

The "Mamasapano Clash" - This was an incident in 2015 where 44 members of the Philippine National
Police were killed in a clash with Muslim rebels in the southern Philippines. The incident was marred by
allegations of miscommunication and poor decision-making by government officials. The present
administration has vowed to find out the truth behind the incident and hold those responsible
accountable.

The "Philippine Drug War" - This is an ongoing campaign against illegal drugs in the Philippines that has
been marred by allegations of extrajudicial killings and human rights abuses. The present administration
under President Duterte has defended the campaign as necessary to combat drug-related crime but has
also promised to investigate and punish those who abuse their power.

14. What is discretionary power? Can it be a source in abuse of

authority? How?

Discretionary power in the Philippine government refers to the authority given to

government officials to make decisions based on their judgment and interpretation of
laws and policies. It allows them to exercise their judgment in situations where the law
or policy is not clear or where there is room for interpretation.

However, discretionary power can also be a source of abuse of authority. When officials
abuse their discretion, they use their power for personal gain or to favor certain
individuals or groups, rather than for the public good.
Here are eight (8) actual cases of abuse of discretionary power in the Philippine government:

1. Kevlar helmet controversy - The former chief of the Philippine National Police (PNP) was accused of
abusing his discretionary power by purchasing overpriced Kevlar helmets for police officers, which were
later found to be substandard.

2. Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) terminal fee scam - Officials of the Manila International
Airport Authority (MIAA) were accused of abusing their discretionary power by illegally collecting
terminal fees from overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) who are exempted from paying such fees.

3. Extrajudicial killings - In the war on drugs, some police officers have been accused of abusing their
discretionary power by carrying out extrajudicial killings without due process, resulting in the loss of
innocent lives and human rights violations.

4. The appointment of corrupt officials - In some cases, discretionary power in the appointment of
government officials has led to the selection of individuals with a history of corruption, who then
continue to abuse their authority for personal gain.

5. Illegal detention of Senator Leila de Lima - Senator Leila de Lima was arrested in 2017 based on what
was widely believed to be trumped-up charges of drug trafficking. This was made possible through the
discretionary power of government officials in interpreting the law and deciding who to prosecute.

6. Killing of Kian delos Santos - In 2017, 17-year-old Kian delos Santos was killed by police officers in a
controversial anti-drug operation. This was made possible through the discretionary power of police
officers in interpreting the law and deciding how to enforce it.

7. Closure of ABS-CBN - In 2020, the government ordered the closure of ABS-CBN, the largest
broadcasting network in the Philippines. This was made possible through the discretionary power of
government officials in interpreting the law and deciding whether to renew the network's franchise.

8. Red-tagging of activists and journalists - In recent years, the government has been accused of red-
tagging, or labeling activists and journalists as communists or terrorists. This was made possible through
the discretionary power of government officials in interpreting the law and deciding who to label as a
threat to national security.

15. There are four (4) known core values in public administration,
namely, professionalism, ethics, accountability and objectivity. Briefly
explain the importance of these values for the public administration.
The four core values in public administration are professionalism, ethics, accountability, and objectivity.
These values are essential to the functioning of public administration as they guide public servants in
their behavior and decision-making.

1) Professionalism involves the use of specialized knowledge and skills in the delivery of public services.
It is important as it ensures that public servants are competent and capable of performing their duties
effectively and efficiently.
One actual case in the Philippines that demonstrates the importance of professionalism in public
administration is the response of the Department of Health (DOH) during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Despite facing challenges such as limited resources and overwhelmed healthcare systems, DOH health
professionals continued to provide quality care and services to the public. They used their specialized
knowledge and skills to develop and implement policies and programs that helped mitigate the spread
of the virus, such as contact tracing and vaccination efforts. The professionalism of DOH health workers
has been crucial in saving lives and protecting public health.

Another example is the implementation of the Philippine National Police (PNP) Internal Cleansing
Program, which aimed to promote professionalism and integrity within the police force. This program
included various measures such as lifestyle checks, random drug tests, and the establishment of an
integrity monitoring and enforcement group. By promoting professionalism and ethical behavior among
police officers, the program aimed to improve public trust and confidence in the police force and
enhance the delivery of public services.

Lastly, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) conducts various capacity-building programs for public
servants to enhance their professional skills and competencies. These programs include trainings,
workshops, and seminars on various topics such as leadership, communication, and technical skills. By
investing in the professional development of public servants, the CSC promotes the importance of
professionalism in public administration and encourages public servants to provide quality services to
the public.

Ethics involves the adherence to moral and ethical principles in the conduct of public affairs. It is
important as it ensures that public servants act with integrity and uphold the public interest.

Lastly, there is the case of the Boracay closure in 2018, where the government ordered the temporary
closure of the island due to environmental concerns. The decision was met with mixed reactions, with
some questioning the ethical implications of the closure on the livelihoods of those who depend on the
island's tourism industry. The case highlighted the importance of balancing environmental and economic
concerns in policymaking and decision-making processes.

Accountability involves the obligation of public servants to be answerable for their actions and decisions.
It is important as it ensures that public servants are held responsible for their performance and use of
public resources.

The COVID-19 pandemic response - The government's handling of the pandemic has been heavily
scrutinized, with calls for accountability in the allocation and distribution of resources, including
personal protective equipment (PPE), testing kits, and vaccines. The public has demanded transparency
and accountability in the government's pandemic response to ensure that resources are being used
effectively and efficiently.

The 2019 SEA Games controversy, where several issues surrounding the preparation and organization of
the Southeast Asian Games hosted by the Philippines surfaced. Some of the issues included overpriced
equipment and facilities, delayed payments to athletes and suppliers, and mismanagement of funds.
The lack of accountability of those involved led to public outrage and calls for investigation and
accountability.

Objectivity involves the ability to make decisions and provide advice based on evidence and impartial
analysis. It is important as it ensures that public servants are not influenced by personal biases or
outside interests.

In summary, these core values are important for the public administration as they promote competence,
integrity, responsibility, and impartiality in the delivery of public services, which are essential for
building public trust and confidence in government institutions.