MANILA, January 8, 2026 — The Philippine National Police (PNP) confirmed that retired Police Brigadier General Jezebel Imelda Medina, former head of the PNP Health Service, may still face a reduction in her pension if she is found guilty in an administrative case filed against her before retirement.

PNP spokesperson Brigadier General Randulf Tuaño explained that Medina’s compulsory retirement on December 25, 2025 does not nullify the complaint lodged two days earlier. “Ang compulsory retirement po kasi ay hindi makaka-epekto sa pendency ng ifinile na kaso bago siya po mag-retire. Ito po ay magpapatuloy hanggang sa mabigyan ng desisyon, resolusyon,” Tuaño said in a press briefing.

The case was filed by the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM) on December 23, 2025, citing two issues: her alleged failure to comply with directives to submit psychiatric and psychological reports for a Quezon City Police District patrolman who was also active as a vlogger, and her appearance in full police uniform while wearing shoes reportedly worth ₱70,599.

NAPOLCOM’s Inspection, Monitoring and Investigation Service filed charges of less grave neglect of duty and conduct unbecoming of a police officer against Medina.

Complaint Details and Allegations

The controversy began when Medina allegedly ignored repeated instructions to provide psychiatric and psychological evaluations for a police officer whose online content had raised concerns. Authorities said her failure to act compromised internal accountability measures.

The second allegation involves Medina’s choice of footwear. She was photographed wearing luxury shoes valued at ₱70,599 while in full police uniform, a move critics said violated standards of conduct and projected an image unbecoming of a senior officer. The incident quickly drew public attention, sparking debate over discipline and professionalism within the PNP.

Pension and Accountability Measures

Tuaño clarified that Medina was able to receive her retirement benefits upon leaving service. However, if she is later found guilty, deductions will be made from her pension. “Kapag nagkaroon ng desisyon later on, assuming po for the sake of argument, na ma-find guilty po ‘yung ating PNP personnel ay ito po ay ibabawas sa kanyang pension,” he explained.

The case highlights broader questions about accountability for retired officials. While some argue that retirement should close the chapter on administrative complaints, others insist that misconduct must be addressed regardless of status to preserve public trust in the police institution.

Is This About Shoes, or Standards?

The ₱70,000 shoes are not the issue. Standards are.

Uniformed service carries ethical boundaries that go beyond price tags. When senior officers appear in luxury items while in uniform, the message is not subtle. It signals comfort, privilege, and distance from the people they are sworn to serve. The public reacts not because of envy, but because symbols matter in institutions built on discipline and restraint.

What deepens frustration is inconsistency. Scrutiny moves fast when it involves visible accessories. It moves painfully slow when it comes to luxury watches, designer bags, or officials tied to far more serious issues like questionable flood control projects. Billions are involved there. Communities suffer real damage. Yet suspensions drag. Investigations crawl.

This uneven pace erodes trust. It creates the impression that ethics enforcement is selective, reactive, and focused on optics rather than substance. Accountability should not depend on how viral a photo becomes or how convenient a case is to pursue.

Public service demands equal standards at all levels and equal urgency across cases.

So the real question is this: are institutions serious about ethics, or only strict when misconduct is easy to spotlight but harder truths are left waiting?