52 years after husband’s death, widow can finally collect pension benefits

THE widow of a soldier who died in the line of duty on November 8, 1971 had to wait 52 long years to collect the pension benefits due to her late husband’s service spanning more than 10 years.

In a nine-page decision, the Commission on Audit granted the claim filed by Anicia V. Ortiz, widow of the late Capt. Antonio O. Ortiz who served as a member of the Armed Forces from May 1, 1960 to November 8, 1971, including a deployment during the Vietnam War.

Records showed he died when the military chopper he was riding in crashed in San Mariano, Isabela. He was declared posthumously “separated from service” on November 9, 1971. His spouse was declared as his legal beneficiary.

In her claim, the widow said she first applied for a survivorship pension in January 1972 before the J-7 in Camp Aguinaldo but was told that no benefit was forthcoming since the policy for eligibility at the time required a minimum service of 20 years. At the time of his passing, Capt. Ortiz had completed 10 years, seven months, and 10 days in uniform.

After being informed of a change in policy, Mrs. Ortiz filed another pension claim in May 2000. It took another two decades before she started receiving her monthly pension in January 2020.

Refusing to give up, she filed a third claim for pension benefits in 2019 only to be informed that her claim was “returned unfunded” by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) due to a prescription based on Article 1144 of the Civil Code.

The widow insisted that while the pensions for November 9, 1971 to May 17, 1990 may have expired by operation of law, her claim for the period of May 18, 1990 to December 31, 2019 remains unaffected as supported by the Legal Opinion issued on January 6, 2020 by the Office of the Judge Advocate General.

Her position was further bolstered by Opinion No. 26 of the Department of Justice released in 2022 stating that “retirement law is to be liberally construed in favor of the intended beneficiary” in accordance with the 1992 Supreme Court ruling in the case of Bengzon vs. Drilon.

The counsel for the AFP Pension and Gratuity Management Center (AFPPGMC), in its answer dated June 7, 2023, held that Mrs. Ortiz is entitled to