EN BANC
|
OFFICE OF THE COURT
ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, - versus - MRS. ELADIA T. CUNTING,
former Clerk of Court, Office of the Clerk of Court, Municipal Trial Court in
Cities, Zamboanga City, Respondent. |
|
A.M. No. P-04-1917 (Formerly A.M. No. 04-10-297-MTCC) Present: PUNO, C.J., QUISUMBING, YNARES-SANTIAGO, SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, CARPIO, AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, CORONA, CARPIO MORALES, AZCUNA, TINGA, CHICO-NAZARIO, VELASCO, JR., NACHURA, and REYES, JJ. Promulgated: December
10, 2007 |
x-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
NACHURA, J.:
This administrative case is the
result of the financial audit conducted by the Office of the Court
Administrator (OCA) in the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) of
On September 4, 2003, the OCA
received a copy of the letter of Atty. Linda Lim, complaining about the Clerk
of Court of the MTCC of Zamboanga City, respondent Eladia T. Cunting, who
allegedly caused the delay in the release of the full amount adjudged in favor
of her client, and the dishonor of the checks due to insufficiency of funds.
This letter-complaint prompted the Fiscal Monitoring Division of the OCA to
form an audit team to investigate the financial state of the said court. The
team audited the books of accounts of the MTCC of Zamboanga City from
On
In
anticipation that I will be obliged to answer for the amount of money that have
not been fully accounted for as a result of the audit, I wish to request you
that said amount be charged to whatever retirement benefits I may be entitled
to, including the commutation of all my leave balances accumulated over the
years that I was an employee of the Supreme Court of the Philippines.
It may likewise be informed that a number of parties have been coming to my residence, accordingly upon advice of some court employees, seeking the refund of bail bonds posted in the respective cases that these parties were involved in, which cases have been either provisionally or permanently dismissed. For this reason, I thus request that my salaries, which I learned have been held in abeyance, be used to answer for such refund of bail bonds. It may be informed that since payment of my salaries and other remunerations is currently suspended, I am not in a position to personally answer for such refund.[1]
On
In accordance with the recommendation
of the OCA, the Court issued a Resolution[2]
dated P10,049,496.60 to the Fiduciary Trust Fund account, P972,634.02
to Judiciary Development Fund account, and P117,093.36 to the Special
Allowance for Judiciary account. She was
also directed to submit the court orders, acknowledgment receipts and other
documents showing the unauthorized withdrawals from the said accounts. In the
same Resolution, the Court resolved to issue a Hold Departure Order against the
respondent and to suspend her pending the resolution of the case. The Court,
likewise, directed the Legal Office of the OCA to file the appropriate criminal
charges against the respondent.
In a letter[3]
dated January 17, 2005, the respondent asked for an additional period of thirty
(30) days within which to comply with the December 1, 2004 Resolution. She
averred that she needed additional time to produce the documents required to be
submitted and to prepare her answer to the charges imputed to her. The Court
granted the request for extension of time. However, the respondent did not
submit any document within the extended period.
On P1,000.00,
or imprisonment of five (5) days, and requiring her to comply with the previous
orders of the Court. Still, the respondent failed to comply. In a Resolution[6]
dated P2,000.00. She was also directed to show cause why she
should not be held in contempt of court for failure to comply with the Court’s
orders.
Thereafter, the OCA reevaluated the
case and reassessed the respondent’s liability to include the withdrawals which
the respondent failed to substantiate. The OCA reported, thus:
First, the
respondent left open the vault. On the
day the audit team arrived at the MTCC of Zamboanga City, respondent was
attending a seminar in
Second,
the audit team found cash amounting to P10,670.30 stored in the
vault. The team had to presume that this
amount forms part of the court collections because the source of the money can
not be confirmed from the respondent who did not report for work during the
entire period of the audit notwithstanding the instruction of Judge Mariano for
her to cut short her attendance in the seminar in Dipolog City so she can
attend to the needs of the audit team.
Third, there were missing accountable forms. The Office of the Clerk of Court of the MTCC of Zamboanga City requisitioned several booklets of official receipts from this Court which the audit team can not find among the records of the said court. These are:
|
O.R. Serial Numbers |
No. of Booklet Packed/Mailed |
Date Mailed |
|
80501 to 81000 |
10 |
08.01.86 |
|
2653001 to 2653500 |
10 |
08.13.92 |
|
10438951 to 10439000 |
01 |
12.16.98 |
|
11148051 to 11148100 |
01 |
05.19.99 |
|
11148901 to 11148950 |
01 |
05.19.99 |
|
13217801 to 13217850 |
01 |
07.14.00 |
|
13218551 to 13218750 |
04 |
07.14.00 |
|
13218801 to 13218850 |
01 |
07.14.00 |
|
14126101 to 14126250 |
03 |
01.31.01 |
|
15067151 to 15067250 |
02 |
07.31.01 |
|
15561151 to 15561250 |
02 |
11.07.01 |
|
16574151 to 16574250 |
02 |
06.04.02 |
|
17220501 to 17220800 |
06 |
11.07.01 |
|
18110151 to 18110250 |
02 |
04.23.03 |
|
Total |
46 |
|
Fourth, the audit team found out that the Office of the Clerk of Court of the MTCC of Zamboanga City issued receipts which were not requisitioned from this Court.
Fifth,
the audit team discovered a shortage in the collections for the Clerk of Court
General Fund in the amount of P116,431.30. The total collections for
this fund from November 1996 to June 2003 is P537,069.54. Deducted therefrom is the amount of P493,452.49
representing the amount properly deposited or remitted to the bank. This left an unremitted balance of P43,617.05. The audit team did not consider as valid
deposits or remittances those amounts reflected in several deposit slips
without any machine validation. These
amounted to P72,814.25. Thus,
insofar as these amounts are concerned, there are doubts as to whether these
deposits were actually made, hence, these have to be treated as unremitted
collections and added to the unremitted balance of P43,617.05. The total accountability of respondent is P116,431.30. This is summarized as follows:
|
Total collections, November 1996 to June 2003 |
|
|
Less: Total Remittances/Deposits |
493,452.49 |
|
Unremitted Collections |
43,617.05 |
|
Add: Unconfirmed Deposits per
Deposit Slips Without
Machine Validations (Schedule
1) |
72,814.25 |
|
Shortage |
|
The deposit
slips without any machine validation are:
|
Date |
Monthly Report |
Deposit Slip Amount |
|
|
Nov. 1996 |
|
|
|
Dec. 1996 |
1,850.00 |
|
|
Jan. 1997 |
1,535.00 |
|
|
Mar. 1997 |
8.00 |
|
|
June 1997 |
1,840.40 |
|
|
Oct. 1997 |
9,080.00 |
|
|
Aug. 1999 |
9,000.00 |
|
|
Nov. 1999 |
3,928.05 |
|
|
Jan. 2000 |
6,160.00 |
|
|
Jan. 2000 |
4,309.00 |
|
|
Jan. 2000 |
2.80 |
|
|
Feb. 2000 |
13,725.00 |
|
|
May 2000 |
3,333.32 |
|
|
May 2000 |
334.68 |
|
|
Oct. 2000 |
4,323.92 |
|
|
Oct. 2000 |
354.08 |
|
|
June 2001 |
3,267.00 |
|
|
Jan. 2002 |
3,515.00 |
|
|
March 2003 |
2,896.00 |
|
|
TOTAL |
|
Sixth, the audit team found out that respondent did not maintain a cash book for the Clerk of Court General Fund for the period of September 1999 to June 2003. The team also noticed that respondent did not regularly submit the monthly reports of collections for the Clerk of Court General Fund. The lacking monthly reports pertain to the months of November 2000, June 2001, October 2002, December 2002, May 2003 and June 2003. As a result, the Accounting Division of this Court was not able to prepare the Subsidiary Ledger for the corresponding months.
Seventh, the audit team noticed numerous mistakes in reporting to this Court the collections in the Clerk of Court General Fund. The team observed discrepancies between the amount indicated in the official receipts and the amount in the monthly reports, to wit:
|
DATE |
O.R. NO. |
AMOUNT PER MONTHLY REPORT |
AMOUNT PER OFFICIAL RECEIPT |
SHORT OVER |
|
|
3782807 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
5.00 |
|
|
3782822 |
1.00 |
2.00 |
1.00 |
|
|
3782846 |
1.00 |
2.00 |
1.00 |
|
|
3782849 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
4.00 |
|
|
3782855 |
1.00 |
10.00 |
9.00 |
|
|
3783002 |
10.00 |
1.00 |
(9.00) |
|
|
3783017 |
5.00 |
250.00 |
245.00 |
|
|
3783024 |
1.00 |
2.00 |
1.00 |
|
|
3783026 |
2.00 |
1.00 |
(1.00) |
|
|
3783053 |
5.00 |
1.00 |
(4.00) |
|
|
3783100 |
1.00 |
10.00 |
9.00 |
|
|
3783101 |
10.00 |
1.00 |
(9.00) |
|
|
3783107 |
1.00 |
10.00 |
9.00 |
|
|
3783122 |
5.00 |
1.00 |
(4.00) |
|
|
3783124 |
5.00 |
1.00 |
(4.00) |
|
|
3783178 |
1.00 |
2.50 |
1.50 |
|
|
3783185 |
1.00 |
2.00 |
1.00 |
|
|
3781393 |
2.00 |
1.00 |
( 1.00) |
|
|
3781394 |
1,970.00 |
2.00 |
(1,968.00) |
|
|
3781395 |
1.00 |
1,970.00 |
1,969.00 |
|
|
3781397 |
2.00 |
1.00 |
(1.00) |
|
|
3781399 |
1.00 |
2.00 |
1.00 |
|
03-93-00 |
3783314 |
1.00 |
10.00 |
9.00 |
|
|
3783356 |
5.00 |
1.00 |
(4.00) |
|
|
3783461 |
4.00 |
28.00 |
24.00 |
|
|
3784533 |
1.00 |
5.00 |
4.00 |
|
|
3784534 |
1.00 |
2.00 |
1.00 |
|
|
3784636 |
48.00 |
52.00 |
4.00 |
|
|
3784718 |
208.00 |
68.00 |
(140.00) |
|
|
12356849 |
2.00 |
4.00 |
2.00 |
|
|
12356850 |
2.00 |
4.00 |
2.00 |
|
|
12356858 |
210.00 |
200.00 |
(10.00) |
|
|
12356972 |
8.00 |
4.00 |
(4.00) |
|
|
12356998 |
2.00 |
204.00 |
202.00 |
|
|
13218778 |
2.00 |
399.00 |
397.00 |
|
TOTALS |
|
2,522.00 |
3,263.00 |
741.50 |
Eighth, there was also a shortage in
the collections for the Judiciary Development Fund in the amount of P574,927.47. The total collection for this fund from
November 1996 to June 2003 is P2,531,283.06. The audit team deducted therefrom the amount
of P2,259,358.67 representing the valid remittances/deposits to the bank.
This left an unaccounted balance of P271,924.39. The team added to the accountability of
respondent the amount of P303,003.08 which was summed up from the
deposit slips without any machine validation.
Under Administrative Circular No. 3-2000 (
|
Total collections,
November 1996 to June 2003 |
|
|
Less: Total Remittances/Deposits |
2,259,358.67 |
|
Unremitted Collections |
271,924.39 |
|
Add: Unconfirmed Deposits per Deposit Slips
Without
Machine Validations (Schedule 2) |
303,003.08 |
|
Shortage |
|
The deposit slips without machine validation are:
|
Date |
Monthly Report |
Deposit Slip Amount |
|
|
February 1997 |
|
|
|
March 1997 |
242.00 |
|
|
October 1997 |
7,270.00 |
|
|
February 1998 |
21,218.00 |
|
|
January 2000 |
7,760.00 |
|
|
January 2000 |
2,197.68 |
|
|
February 2000 |
26,366.70 |
|
|
February 2000 |
1,327.75 |
|
|
February 2000 |
756.15 |
|
|
March 2000 |
12,027.00 |
|
|
May 2000 |
55,179.35 |
|
|
May 2000 |
52.65 |
|
|
October 2000 |
5,185.00 |
|
|
October 2000 |
128.00 |
|
|
September 2001 |
146.00 |
|
|
November 2001 |
10,000.00 |
|
|
December 2001 |
28,357.39 |
|
|
January 2002 |
49,632.00 |
|
|
February 2002 |
11,740.60 |
|
|
September 2002 |
8,260.60 |
|
|
September 2002 |
19,500.25 |
|
|
November 2002 |
8,440.00 |
|
|
March 2003 |
130.00 |
|
|
April 2003 |
9,500.00 |
|
|
April 2003 |
5,212.67 |
|
|
April 2003 |
2,108.46 |
|
|
April 2003 |
541.23 |
|
|
June 2003 |
2,435.00 |
|
TOTAL |
|
|
The audit team discovered a
discrepancy in the amount indicated in a deposit slip. The deposit slip dated P11,400.00 while the
machine validated slip indicated a deposit of P10,958.33 or a difference
of P481.67.
The collections for the Judiciary Development Fund were not accurately recorded in the monthly reports. The audit team discovered discrepancies between the amount indicated in the official receipts and those indicated in the cash book, the net effect of which is that the collections reported to the Accounting Division of this Court were understated. These discrepancies are:
|
DATE |
O.R. NO. |
AMOUNT PER MONTHLY REPORT |
AMOUNT PER OFFICIAL REPORT |
SHORT (OVER) |
|
|
647427 |
46.00 |
96.00 |
50.00 |
|
|
647578 |
10.00 |
50.00 |
40.00 |
|
|
749837 |
174.00 |
446.00 |
272.00 |
|
|
6641025 |
0.00 |
48.00 |
48.00 |
|
|
6717806 |
48.00 |
10.00 |
(38.00) |
|
|
6717827 |
50.00 |
10.00 |
(40.00) |
|
|
6717828 |
50.00 |
10.00 |
(40.00) |
|
|
6717831 |
48.00 |
10.00 |
(38.00) |
|
|
6717860 |
48.00 |
2.00 |
(46.00) |
|
|
6799025 |
10.00 |
50.00 |
40.00 |
|
|
6799361 |
48.00 |
10.00 |
(38.00) |
|
|
6799362 |
48.00 |
10.00 |
(38.00) |
|
|
8205617 |
84.00 |
116.00 |
32.00 |
|
|
8205639 |
2.00 |
48.00 |
46.00 |
|
|
12355457 |
232.00 |
222.00 |
(10.00) |
|
|
12358578 |
15.00 |
50.00 |
35.00 |
|
TOTALS |
|
|
|
|
Still in connection with the Judiciary Development Fund, there was no cash book for the months of January to June 2003. There were no monthly reports for December 1996, November 1997, for the entire year of 1999, November 2000, November and December 2002, and January to June 2003.
Finally, the audit team discovered
the biggest shortage in the Fiduciary Fund amounting to P11,338,382.54.
This was a result of a variety of irregular transactions. First, cash bail in
the total amount of P12,400.00 was released without any supporting court
orders authorizing the release thereof. Neither were these accompanied by
acknowledgment receipts whereby the accused acknowledges his/her receipt of the
released cash bail. These involve three
(3) transactions, to wit:
|
DATE |
O.R. NO. |
CASE NO. |
PAYEE |
AMOUNT |
|
|
559919 |
96-34 |
E. Teodoro |
|
|
|
647322 |
39250 |
A. Garcia |
4,200.00 |
|
|
647323 |
39250 |
L. Tingkasan |
4,200.00 |
|
TOTAL |
|
|
|
|
There
were also twenty-six (26) instances wherein the cash bail amounting to P264,000.00
was released without any supporting court orders authorizing the release. These
are:
|
DATE |
O.R. NO. |
CASE NO. |
PAYEE |
AMOUNT |
|
|
749661 |
39712 |
L. Visitacion |
|
|
|
3784223 |
42805-815 |
Atty. S. Sotto, Jr. |
90,000.00 |
|
|
8081383 |
40995-001 |
T. Kwan |
52,500.00 |
|
|
8083093 |
41541 |
R. Liguitan |
4,500.00 |
|
|
8083105 |
40893 |
O. Aizon |
1,000.00 |
|
|
8083163 |
41367 |
L. Isidro |
1,000.00 |
|
|
8206378 |
41680 |
L. Rodriguez |
7,500.00 |
|
|
8206426 |
41994 |
A. Isahac |
4,500.00 |
|
|
8206428 |
41272-73 |
H. Concepcion |
2,000.00 |
|
|
8206554 |
41965 |
R. Alfaro |
6,000.00 |
|
|
8206605 |
41669 |
T. Raz |
2,000.00 |
|
|
8403623 |
41758 |
P. Bello |
1,000.00 |
|
|
8403624 |
42511-12 |
E. Canseco |
24,000.00 |
|
|
11148923 |
41758 |
P. Bello |
1,000.00 |
|
|
11148924 |
42511-12 |
E. Canseco |
24,000.00 |
|
|
13218554 |
43501 |
F. Dionisio |
4,500.00 |
|
|
13218556 |
43402 |
I. Galvez |
5,000.00 |
|
|
13218566 |
43658 |
V. Alam-alam |
7,500.00 |
|
|
13218593 |
42181 |
R. Ramasamyalios |
2,000.00 |
|
|
13218654 |
42180-81 |
R. de Mesa |
4,000.00 |
|
|
13218674 |
35569 |
R. Luisito |
100.00 |
|
|
14126198 |
44530-31 |
R. Fernando |
4,000.00 |
|
|
17220712 |
45440 |
R. Soler |
6,000.00 |
|
|
17220713 |
45470 |
K. Lukman |
6,000.00 |
|
|
749661 |
39712 |
L. Visitacion |
4,500.00 |
|
|
3784223 |
42805-815 |
Atty. S. Sotto, Jr. |
90,000.00 |
|
TOTAL |
|
|
|
|
In
eleven (11) transactions, cash bail amounting to P237,700.00 was
released without any acknowledgment receipt. Since there was no proof that the
accused actually received the released cash bail, this amount shall be
considered as part of the accountability of the respondent. These transactions
are:
|
DATE |
O.R. NO. |
CASE NO. |
PAYEE |
AMOUNT |
|
|
6641702 |
40140-143 |
R. Jalandoni |
|
|
|
6641724 |
39632 |
M. Akmad |
1,000.00 |
|
|
6641730 |
34895-896 |
S. Benasing |
4,000.00 |
|
|
6641766 |
39457 |
L. Dayaganon |
2,000.00 |
|
|
6641778 |
40060 |
M. Chiong |
2,000.00 |
|
|
6641790 |
30326 |
N. Polalon |
100.00 |
|
|
6641792 |
40146 |
C/S Candido |
9,000.00 |
|
|
6641800 |
26201-06 |
L. Basid |
203,000.00 |
|
|
6641822 |
40002-04 |
C. Gestoso |
6,000.00 |
|
|
6718274 |
40198-99 |
P. Perez |
4,000.00 |
|
|
8206670 |
37717 |
C. Culs |
600.00 |
|
TOTAL |
|
|
|
|
Court
fines were collected but not remitted to the Fiduciary Fund. This amounted to P321.50, the details
of which are:
|
DATE |
O.R. NO. |
CASE NO. |
PAYEE |
AMOUNT |
|
|
3520447 |
14126 |
J. Aminula |
|
|
|
3520448 |
15141 |
J. Aminula |
110.00 |
|
|
13219738 |
35694 |
|
101.50 |
|
TOTAL |
|
|
|
|
Confiscated cash bail amounting to P554,400.00
were withdrawn from the Fiduciary Fund account but were not remitted to the
[J]udiciary [Development] [F]und account.
The audit team discovered that
respondent was collecting a fee of 1% for every money received by the court
such as cash bail, consignments, rental deposits, etc. However, there are no
records that the fees collected were remitted to the bank. The total fees
collected by respondent amounted to P219,464.44.
Finally, the audit team computed the
total cash bail, supersedeas bonds, consignations and rental deposits that were
supposedly unwithdrawn from the bank.
This amounted to P10,212,693.75.
However, the total balance in the bank accounts maintained by respondent
for the MTCC of Zamboanga City is nowhere near this amount. Current Account No. 1952-0007-28 has a
balance of only P160,436.55 while Savings Account No. 1951-0113-94 has
only P1,761.20 for a total of P162,197.75. This should be deducted from P10,212,693.75
leaving a balance of P10,049,496.60. This represents the amount of
unwithdrawn and unaccounted Fiduciary Fund collections for which the respondent
is responsible.
All in all, the liability of the
respondent for the Fiduciary Fund is P11,338,382.54 which is broken down
as follows:
|
No Court
Order and Acknowledgment Receipt |
|
|
No Court
Order |
264,600.00 |
|
No
Acknowledgment Receipt |
237,700.00 |
|
Court fines
collected but not remitted |
321.50 |
|
Confiscated
Bonds which were withdrawn but Not remitted |
554,400.00 |
|
Commission
on Cash Held in Trust but not Remitted |
219,464.44 |
|
Unwithdrawn
Cash Bond |
10,049,496.60 |
|
Total
Unwithdrawn Fiduciary Fund |
|
Based on the foregoing, the OCA
recommended that:
1. Ms.
Eladia T. Cunting, Clerk of Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities,
2. The Financial Management Office, Office of the Court Administrator, be DIRECTED to process the terminal leave benefits of the respondent, dispensing with the documentary requirements, and to remit the said benefit to the Fiduciary Fund account of the MTCC of Zamboanga City;
3. Ms. Cunting be FOUND GUILTY of contempt of court for failing to return the missing funds despite repeated demands;
4. Ms.
Cunting be DIRECTED to restitute the following amounts to their respective
accounts:
a. P116,431.30
– Clerk of Court General Fund
b. P574,927.47
– Judiciary Development Fund
c. P10,899,019.03[7] –
Fiduciary Fund
5. Director Nestor M. Mantaring, National Bureau of Investigation, be DIRECTED to cause the arrest of Ms. Eladia T. Cunting and to detain her until she complies with the directive of this Court to restitute the above-mentioned shortages.
The findings and recommendations of
the OCA are well taken.
The administration of justice is
circumscribed with a heavy burden of responsibility. It requires everyone
involved in its dispensation -- from the justices and judges to the lowliest
clerks -- to live up to the strictest standards of competence, integrity and
diligence in the public service.[8] As
frontliners in the administration of justice, they should live up to the
strictest standards of honesty and integrity.
They must bear in mind that the image of a court of justice is
necessarily mirrored in the conduct, official or otherwise, of the men and
women who work there.[9]
Clerks of court, in particular, must
be individuals of competence, honesty and probity, charged as they are with
safeguarding the integrity of the court and its proceedings.[10]
They perform a delicate function as designated custodians of the court's funds,
revenues, records, properties and premises.[11] As
such, they are
responsible for ensuring that the court’s funds are promptly deposited with an
authorized government depositary bank. Thus, they are liable for any loss,
shortage, destruction or impairment of such funds and property.[12]
This Court will not countenance dishonesty and malversation, for these offenses
diminish the faith of the people in the Judiciary.[13]
The respondent failed to live up to
these exacting standards. She had been grossly negligent in her duties as shown
by the following incidents: (1) she left open the court’s vault while attending
a seminar in Dipolog City; (2) she left P10,670.30 inside the vault; (3)
forty-six (46) booklets of official receipts were missing; and (4) she used
receipts not requisitioned from the Property Division of the OCA.
Her most serious infractions were the
shortages in the Clerk of Court General Fund, Judiciary Development Fund, and
the Fiduciary Fund, which amounted to P12,029,741.31. Several
irregularities contributed to the accumulation of these shortages: (1)
respondent did not deposit some amount of the court’s collections as shown by
deposit slips which were not machine validated by the bank; (2) monthly reports
were not regularly submitted to the Court; (3) reports submitted to the Court
contained numerous discrepancies between the amounts reported and the amounts
appearing in the official receipts, deposit slips or cash books; (4) she did
not maintain a cash book for the Judiciary Development Fund; (5) respondent
withdrew cash bail from the Fiduciary Fund without court orders or without any
acknowledgment receipts; (6) fines imposed on the cash bail were not remitted;
(7) confiscated cash bails were not remitted to the Judiciary Development Fund;
and (8) respondent did not remit the 1% commission she collected on money
received by the court.
The fact that respondent
failed to exert any effort to defend herself from the charges against her
exacerbates her predicament. The natural instinct of a man is to resist an
unfounded claim or imputation and defend himself, for it is totally against
human nature to remain silent and say nothing in the face of false accusations.
Silence, in such cases, is almost always construed as an implied admission of
the truth thereof. Thus, in the absence of any compelling reason to hold otherwise,
we take respondent’s silence as a waiver to file her comment and an
acknowledgment of the truthfulness of the charges against her.[14]
Worse, she had effectively admitted
her accountability for the shortages in the court’s funds when she wrote the
letter to Judge Mariano requesting that her accrued leave credits be used to
answer for any amount which the audit team would find unaccounted for.
Dishonesty, particularly that which amounts to malversation of public funds,
will not be tolerated. Otherwise, courts of justice may come to be regarded as
mere havens of thievery and corruption.[15]
The seriousness of respondent’s
infractions amounts to gross neglect of duty, dishonesty and grave misconduct,
and merits dismissal from the service. However, on P40,000.00 to be deducted from her accrued leave credits.
The
recommendation to hold the respondent in contempt of court is likewise
warranted. Indifference to the Court’s Resolutions requiring the production of
certain documents makes respondent guilty of contempt of court. Such cavalier
attitude disregards the duty of every employee in the Judiciary to obey the
orders and processes of this Court without delay.[18]
When the contempt consists in the refusal to do an act which is still within
the power of respondent to perform, she may be imprisoned by order of the court
until she performs it.[19]
WHEREFORE,
respondent Eladia T. Cunting is found GUILTY
of gross neglect of duty, dishonesty and grave misconduct. In view of her previous dismissal
from the service, a FINE in the
amount of P40,000.00 is imposed on respondent to be deducted from her
accrued leave credits.
Respondent is further ordered to RESTITUTE the following amounts to
their respective accounts:
a.
P116,431.30 – Clerk of Court General Fund
b.
P574,927.47 – Judiciary Development Fund
c.
P11,338,382.54 – Fiduciary Fund
The Employees’ Leave Division, Office
of Administrative Services-OCA, is likewise DIRECTED to compute the respondent’s earned leave credits and to
forward it to the Finance Division, Fiscal Management Office-OCA, which shall
compute the money value of the balance, as well as other benefits that she may
be entitled to, to be included as payment of the fine and partial restitution
of the computed shortages.
In addition, the respondent is found GUILTY of contempt of court for her
failure to comply with the Court’s orders. For this reason, the National Bureau
of Investigation is DIRECTED to
cause the arrest of respondent Eladia T. Cunting and to detain her until she
complies with the directive of this Court to restitute the balance of the shortages,
after deduction of the balance of her accrued leave credits.
SO ORDERED.
ANTONIO
EDUARDO B. NACHURA
Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief Justice
LEONARDO A. QUISUMBING
Associate Justice
|
CONSUELO
YNARES-SANTIAGO Associate Justice |
|
ANGELINA
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ Associate Justice
|
ANTONIO T. CARPIO Associate Justice
|
|
MA. ALICIA
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ Associate Justice
|
RENATO
C. CORONA
Associate Justice
|
|
CONCHITA
CARPIO MORALES Associate Justice |
ADOLFO S.
AZCUNA Associate Justice |
|
DANTE O.
TINGA Associate Justice
|
MINITA V. CHICO-NAZARIO Associate Justice
|
|
PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR. Associate Justice |
RUBEN T.
REYES Associate Justice |
[1] Rollo, p. 46.
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7] The
OCA deducted from the total shortage of P11,338,382.54 the respondent’s
accrued leave credits of 395.815, which has the money value of P439,363.51.
[8] In Re: Report on the Judicial and Financial
Audit Conducted in the Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Koronadal City,
A.M. No. 02-9-233, April 27, 2005, 457 SCRA 356, 369.
[9] Office of the Court Administrator v. Nacuray,
A.M. No. P-03-1739,
[10] Report on the Financial Audit Conducted at
the Municipal Trial Courts of Bani, Alaminos, and Lingayen, in Pangasinan,
462 Phil. 535, 544 (2003)
[11] In Re: Report on the Judicial and Financial
Audit Conducted in the Municipal Trial Court in Cities,
[12]
[13]
[14] Re: Complaint Against Atty. Wilfredo B.
Claveria for Misappropriation of Judiciary Funds, A. M. No. P-02-1626,
[15] Office
of the Court Administrator v. Nacuray, supra note 9, at 542.
[16] Alenio
v. Cunting, AM. No. P-05-1975,
[17] See
Sibulo v.
[18] Office of the Court Administrator v. Nacuray,
supra note 9, at 541.
[19] RULES OF COURT, Rule 71, Sec. 8.