ABDULMAID K. MUIN, |
|
A.M. No. P-04-1831 |
Petitioner, |
|
(Formerly OCA IPI No. 03-1690-P |
|
|
|
|
|
Present: |
|
|
|
|
|
PUNO,
C.J., |
|
|
QUISUMBING, |
|
|
YNARES-SANTIAGO, |
|
|
CARPIO,* |
- versus - |
|
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, |
|
|
|
|
|
CARPIO
MORALES, |
|
|
AZCUNA,
|
|
|
TINGA, |
|
|
CHICO-NAZARIO, |
|
|
VELASCO, Jr., |
|
|
NACHURA, |
|
|
DE CASTRO, |
SAMUEL A.
AVESTRUZ, JR., |
|
BRION, and |
Interpreter and
former Officer-in- |
|
PERALTA, JJ. |
Charge, Regional Trial Court, |
|
|
Branch 5, Bongao,
Tawi-Tawi, |
|
Promulgated: |
Respondent. |
|
February
2, 2009 |
x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
R E S O L U T I O N
PER CURIAM:
The court is concerned
about the propensity of accountable officers in the judiciary to yield to the
temptation to use public funds for personal interests. But, as it tries to devise the appropriate
action to strengthen the moral fiber and strength of character of the employees
and officers that constitute the judiciary, this court shall never be less
strict in applying only the highest standards of propriety, decorum, integrity,
uprightness and honesty from the highest judicial officer of the land to the
humblest court employee, for the ultimate power of this court lies in its
incorruptibility.[1]
These
were the words of the Court when it dismissed from the service Carmelita S.
Mongcupa, whose position respondent assumed.[2] Instead of rectifying his predecessor's
errors however, respondent committed the same odious acts for which he, too,
must face the same penalty.
Court
Interpreter Samuel A. Avestruz (respondent) was designated by Executive Judge
Carlito A. Eisma, through Administrative Order No. 01-94, as Officer-in-Charge
(OIC), Clerk of Court, Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 5, Bongao, Tawi-Tawi
effective August 3, 1994, to replace Carmelita S. Mongcupa who was relieved of
her duties due to her failure to submit the required reports and present the
bankbook of the court's collections.[3]
In
January of 2002, Judge Abdulmaid Muin (Judge Muin),[4]
who took over Branch 5 after Judge Eisma retired, directed respondent to turn over
the bankbook, money and other properties of the court under his custody to the
new OIC-Clerk of Court Abu B. Talipan (Talipan). On
In
a letter of the same date, Judge Muin also requested the National Bureau of
Investigation (NBI), Region 9, Zamboanga City,[7]
to investigate the anomaly, and it was discovered that respondent, with the aid
of Federico Flores, a document examiner of the Land Bank of the Philippines,
Bongao Branch, was able to make withdrawals on four different occasions from
October 9, 2001 to January 7, 2002, without the necessary court orders and
signatures of the presiding judge.[8] The NBI through a letter dated
In
a 1st Indorsement dated
In a Resolution dated
The fact that respondent
has been dropped from the rolls per Resolution dated January 21, 2004[15]
does not deprive the Court of its authority to resolve the instant
administrative case, since the complaint was filed long before such dropping.[16]
On
July 5, 2004, the Court issued a Resolution requiring respondent anew to file a
comment on the complaint; requesting the NBI Zamboanga City to serve a copy of
the Resolution on respondent at RTC Branch 5 and at respondent's last known
residential address, and to make a return of service thereon; and directing the
OCA to form a team to conduct a special fiscal audit on the books and accounts
of RTC Branch 5 and submit a report thereon.[17]
On
In
the Memorandum dated May 25, 2005, the OCA[20]
reported that it was unable to come up with the final figure of respondent's
accountability for all the funds collected since there were no records found in
the court except for the few gathered by the investigating team. Nevertheless, the audit team found that there
was a shortage of P8,473.00 in the Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) and
a shortage of P1,738,579.00 in the Fiduciary Fund (FF).[21]
The
Court then issued on September 12, 2005 a Resolution: (1) directing respondent
to pay and deposit to the Fiduciary Fund Account the total sum of P1,738,579.00,
and to the Judiciary Development Fund the total amount of P8,473.00; (2)
directing Judge Muin to open a new and interest- bearing savings account with
the Land Bank of the Philippines under the name of RTC Bongao, Tawi-Tawi, with
him and OIC Talipan as authorized signatories; (3) directing the OCA to
determine and report on the liability of the judge concerned; (4) directing the
Legal Office of the OCA to file the appropriate criminal charges against
respondent; (5) directing the NBI to locate the whereabouts of respondent,
serve a copy of the resolution on him, and issue a hold-departure order against
respondent to prevent him from leaving the country.[22]
In
a Memorandum dated
The
OCA then recommended that
x x x Mr. Samuel A.
Avestruz, Jr. be FOUND GUILTY of a grave offense and that he be DISMISSED FROM
THE SERVICE with forfeiture of retirement benefits, except accrued leave
credits, and perpetual disqualification from reemployment in the government
service, including government owned and
controlled corporations.[24]
The
Court finds the OCA recommendation to be proper.
Custodians
of court’s funds perform very delicate functions and are liable for any loss,
shortage or impairment thereof.[25] In this case, respondent was
designated as OIC-Clerk of Court of RTC Branch 5 on August 4, 1994 through Administrative Order No. 01-94 issued by Judge Eisma, giving
respondent the authority to issue official receipts for all monies
intended for the court, to deposit the same in the official depository bank, to
remit the amounts to the proper governmental agencies, to regularly submit the
required reports to the Supreme Court, and to effect withdrawals of monies from
the bank when authorized by a court order and countersigned by the presiding
judge.[26]
Respondent
failed to perform his duties. He left
Tawi-Tawi with his family, without properly turning over the funds of the court
as well as the books of account when Judge Muin asked him to make the necessary
turn over to his successor. He also left
a shortage of P8,473.00 in the Judiciary Development Fund and P1,738,579.00
in the Fiduciary Fund.
The
Court has held that an accountable officer may be convicted of malversation
even in the absence of direct proof of misappropriation for as long as there is
evidence of shortage in his accounts which he is unable to explain.[27] The Court also ruled that the failure of a
clerk of court, who is designated as custodian of the court's funds, revenues
and properties shall be liable for any loss or shortage thereof, and his
failure to account for the shortage in the funds he was handling and to turn over
the money deposited with him constitutes dishonesty, grave misconduct and
malversation, which are grave offenses punished by dismissal even for the first
offense.[28]
Respondent
was given several opportunities to clear his name. The Court even sought the aid of the NBI to
locate his whereabouts in order to afford him the opportunity to come to Court
and explain the anomalies. Respondent,
however, has failed up to this date has failed to submit any comment and has
left Tawi-Tawi, with his present whereabouts unknown. Such behavior is contrary to that of an
innocent man whose first impulse is to express his innocence at the first
opportune time. Indeed, flight is an
indicium of guilt and an implied admission of one's liability for the
shortages.[29]
The
NBI investigation also yielded the finding that respondent was able to make
unauthorized withdrawals of court funds without the necessary court orders and
signatures of the presiding judge and with the aid of a bank employee. These findings, together with his flight,
invariably point to his culpability.
The fact that respondent discharged his functions only in an acting
capacity, or as an officer-in-charge, also cannot absolve him from liability,
as the expectation for him to perform all the duties and responsibilities of a
Clerk of Court is not diminished.[30]
Considering
the foregoing, the Court has no choice but to impose on respondent the penalty
of dismissal from the service.
The
Court has repeatedly pronounced, and respondent is not unaware, that the
conduct and behavior of everyone connected with the judiciary, from the
presiding judge to the lowest clerk, is circumscribed with a heavy burden of
responsibility. And the Court will not
hesitate to impose the ultimate penalty of dismissal from the service, for the
Court has never and will never condone any conduct that would violate the norms
of public accountability and diminish or even tend to diminish the faith of the
people in the justice system.[31]
WHEREFORE,
Court Interpreter and former Officer-in-Charge Samuel A. Avestruz, Jr. of the
Regional Trial Court, Branch 5, Bongao, Tawi-Tawi is found guilty of
dishonesty, grave misconduct and malversation and is ordered DISMISSED
from the service effective immediately with forfeiture of retirement benefits,
except accrued leave credits, with prejudice to re-employment in any branch,
instrumentality or agency of the government, including government owned or
controlled corporations. He is further
ordered to RESTITUTE the shortages incurred in the Judiciary Development
Fund and Fiduciary Fund amounting to P8,473.00 and P1,738,579.00
respectively.
The Finance Division,
Financial Management Office of the Office of the Court Administrator is DIRECTED
to compute the monetary value of respondent's accrued leave credits and to
apply the same as part of the restitution of the shortage.
The Office of the Court
Administrator is directed to cause the filing of appropriate criminal charges
against Samuel A. Avestruz, Jr.
SO
ORDERED.
REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief Justice
LEONARDO A. QUISUMBING Associate Justice |
CONSUELO
YNARES-SANTIAGO Associate Justice |
(On Official Leave)
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 |
ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA Associate Justice |
TERESITA J. LEONARDO- DE CASTRO Associate Justice |
(On leave) (On
leave)
ARTURO D. BRION Associate Justice |
DIOSDADO M. PERALTA Associate Justice |
* On official leave, per Special
Order No. 548 dated
[1] Sy v. Mongcupa, 335 Phil. 182, 187 (1997).
[2] Rollo, p. 4. See also Sy v. Mongcupa, supra note 1.
[3] Rollo, p. 4. In Sy v.
Mongcupa, supra note 1, Mongcupa was dismissed from the service for serious
misconduct for her failure to explain the shortage in the court's funds in the
amount of P237,084.99.
[4] Judge Muin was appointed as
presiding judge of Branch 5 on
[5]
[6]
[7] Through a letter dated
[8] Rollo, p. 2.
[9]
[10]
[11] Through then Court Administrator Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr.
[12] Rollo, p. 19.
[13]
[14] OCA Report dated
[15] In
A.M. No. 03-11-655-RTC (Re: Absence Without Official Leave [AWOL] of Mr. Samuel
A. Avestruz Jr.), id. at 28.
[16] Commission on Audit –Region VI v.
Pamposa, A.M. No. P-07-2291,
[17] Rollo, p. 31, The Court in the same Resolution ordered the Fiscal Management Office (FMO) to withhold or suspend the processing of papers of respondent if ever he would attempt to collect his accrued leaves or any other monetary benefits from the Court.
[18] Through a 1st Indorsement from NBI Regional Director Carlos Saunar addressed to the Court's Second Division Clerk of Court Ludichi Yasay-Nunag, rollo, p. 37.
[19]
[20] Through Court Administrator Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr, Deputy Court Administrator Christopher O. Lock and Chief of the Court Management Office Thelma C. Bahia.
[21] Rollo, pp. 41-44.
[22] Rollo, pp. 62-68.
[23]
[24]
[25] See Office
of the Court Administrator v. Bernardino, A.M. No. P-97-1258,
[26] Rollo, p. 4.
[27] Re: Report on the Financial Audit
Conducted in the MTCC-OCC,
[28] Office
of the Court Administrator v. Varela, A.M. No. P-06-2113,
[29] Commission on Audit v. Pamposa, supra
note 16, at 474; Office of the Court Administrator v. Nacuray, A.M. No.
P-03-1739,
[30] Office of the Court Administrator v. Varela, supra note 28, at 22.
[31] Office
of the Court Administrator v.
Bernardino, supra note 25, at 120-121.