EN BANC
GERARDO Q. FERRERAS, Complainant, - versus – RUDY
P. ECLIPSE, Utility Worker I, Regional Trial Court, Branch 66, Baler, Aurora, Respondent. |
|
A.M. No. P-05-2085
Present: PUNO,
C.J., CARPIO, CORONA, CARPIO MORALES, VELASCO, JR., NACHURA, LEONARDO-DE
CASTRO, BRION,
PERALTA, BERSAMIN, DEL CASTILLO, ABAD, VILLARAMA, JR., PEREZ, and MENDOZA, JJ. Promulgated: _________________ |
x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
D E C I S I O N
PER
CURIAM:
The
instant administrative case stems from the Letter[1]
dated April 15, 2005 of Executive Judge Corazon D. Soluren, Regional Trial
Court (RTC), Baler, Aurora, transmitting for appropriate action and
disposition, the “Memorandum for The Executive Judge, RTC, Baler, Aurora” of
Gerardo Q. Ferreras, Evidence Custodian, Office of the Provincial Prosecutor,
Baler, Aurora. Enclosed in the said
letter were the following documents which served as the basis for the
administrative complaint against Rudy Eclipse, Utility Worker I, RTC, Branch
66, Baler, Aurora, for Tampering of Evidence allegedly committed within the
premises of the Bulwagan ng Katarungan
of the RTC on February 13, 2004 at 2:30 a.m.:
1.
Memorandum
of Preliminary Investigation in I.S. No. 2004-387 entitled GERARDO Q. FERRERAS
v. RUDY P. ECLIPSE for TAMPERING OF EVIDENCE;[2]
2.
Sworn
Statement of Mr. Gerardo Q. Ferreras, evidence custodian, dated November 9,
2004;[3]
3.
Sworn
Statement of Mr. Ronald M. Gusilatar, Security Guard, dated November 9, 2004;[4]
4.
Sworn
Statement of Mrs. Marivic S. Ritual dated December 10, 2004;[5]
5.
Photocopy
of Security Logbook page 266 with the entry showing that Mr. Rudy P. Eclipse
entered the Court Building at 4:00 am on February 13, 2004 and with an entry
stating that Mr. Rudy P. Eclipse changed the right shock;[6]
6.
Pictures
of the motorcycle with the tampered shock.
On
May 26, 2005, Acting Court Administrator Zenaida N. Elepaño of the Office of
the Court Administrator (OCA) required respondent Eclipse to file his Comment,[7]
which the latter complied with on July 8, 2005.[8] Subsequently, complainant filed his Reply to
the said Comment.[9]
In
view of the conflicting versions presented by the parties, a formal hearing was
deemed necessary; thus, upon the recommendation of the OCA in its Report dated
September 15, 2005, the Court resolved to: (a) REDOCKET the instant
administrative case as a regular administrative complaint against Rudy P.
Eclipse; and (b) REFER the matter to the Executive Judge, RTC, Baler, Aurora,
for investigation, report and recommendation sixty (60) days from receipt of
the record.[10]
On
November 14, 2005, the Court referred the case to the Executive Judge of the
RTC, Baler, Aurora for investigation, report and recommendation. On February
25, 2006, Executive Judge Corazon D. Soluren made her report and
recommendation.
The
facts were summarized by Executive Judge Soluren as follows:
THE COMPLAINT
Complainant
Gerardo Q. Ferreras, hereinafter referred to as Ferreras, charged respondent
Rudy P. Eclipse, hereinafter referred to as Eclipse, of having changed the rear
right shock of a blue Yamaha RS 100 motorcycle, with chassis and motor No.
4PF214216 and plate number RF-2658, which was submitted as an evidence to the
Office of the Provincial Prosecutor (OPP) of Aurora. The offense allegedly took place on February
13, 2004 at 2:30 o’clock in the morning inside the RTC Building at Baler,
Aurora, where the said OPP is also located.
It was allegedly seen by Ronald Gusilatar, the security guard of the
building at the time.
The two branches
of the RTC at Baler, Aurora, and the OPP are housed in the same building, which
is guarded by security guards.
Happenings in the building are entered in a logbook kept by the security
guards.
When asked by
the undersigned at the preliminary conference held on November 18, 2005, the
parties opted to have counsels of their own and to have formal hearings on the
complaint. Thus, hearings were set on
December 1, 2, 7 and 9, 2005 and the parties, assisted by Atty. Jobert Reyes of
the Public Attorney’s Office and Atty. Gerardo Noveras, respectively, presented
their witnesses and documentary evidence.
Additional hearing dates were agreed upon due to some valid reasons,
such as the unavailability of counsels and/or witnesses on some hearing dates.
VERSION OF THE COMPLAINANT
Complainant Ferreras presented as
witnesses: Ronald Gusilatar, himself, Rommel Gonzales, Marivic Ritual and Eric
Carillo.
Sometime before
the incident took place on February 13, 2004, Ferreras, evidence custodian of
the OPP since October 1, 1988, received a blue-colored Yamaha RS 100 motorcycle
which was confiscated by the police from a certain Ronnie Sollegue y Juego, a
suspect in a drug-related case. The
motorcycle was placed outside the door of the OPP but within the RTC building.
Ronald
Gusilatar, hereinafter referred to as Gusilatar, was one of the security guards
securing the building. When Gusilatar
became a security guard in January 2004, he was told by Eclipse to “makisama
ka” (get along with others/cooperate with others), which he did because Eclipse
was known to be very close to the Honorable Judge Armando A. Yanga (hereinafter
referred to as Judge Yanga), Presiding Judge of Branch 66, RTC, Baler, Aurora,
and then Executive Judge who approved his (Gusilatar’s) employment, and to be
the cause of the dismissal of some security guards, particularly of one named
Nano (Nato) Sollano.
Eclipse, being a
Utility Worker I who lives near the RTC and has a tricycle with a blue Yamaha
RS 100, usually came before or about 4:00 o’clock in the morning to clean the
building. On Febuary 13, 2004, at 2:30
o’clock in the morning, when Gusilatar was the guard on duty, Eclipse entered
the building. The lights of the building
were put on. When Gusilatar stood up and
walked away from the security guard’s table near the entrance door of the
building, he saw Eclipse near the blue-colored Yamaha motorcycle, one of three
motorcycles placed near the door of the OPP.
He saw Eclipse take out the rear right shock of the blue-colored
motorcycle and changed it with another, which later turned out to be
damaged. Thereafter, Eclipse, with the
shock under his armpit, went out of the building and went home. Gusilatar did not stop him because he
remembered Eclipse’s advice to “makisama ka”.
After Eclipse [had] left, he went near the motorcycles and looked at the
blue-colored motorcycle, the rear right shock of which was taken and replaced
with another by Eclipse. Then, he made
an entry in the security logbook that Eclipse changed the shock of the
motorcycle at 2:30 o’clock in the morning of February 13, 2004. He did not inform Judge Yanga and the
provincial prosecutors about the incident but he told it to some court
employees about three days after the incident.
In compliance
with an order of Judge Yanga, dated September 10, 2004, Ferreras released the
motorcycle to its owner Marivic Ritual on October 7, 2004. Ritual noticed that the rear right shock of
her motorcycle appeared to have been changed.
She was then accompanied by the chief mechanic of Norkis, seller of said
motorcycle, who informed her that the rear right shock of the motorcycle was
changed. As she [had] purchased it on
installment basis, the motorcycle was brought to Norkis.
Eric Carillo of
Norkis testified that when the Yamaha motorcycle was released from the OPP on
October 7, 2004, he noticed that there were missing and damaged parts of the
same. They did not immediately do
anything to the motorcycle. However,
after a week, he detached the rear shock as it was already disconnected. He noticed that it was damaged and [was] an
old one.
When she was
informed of the missing and damaged parts of the Yamaha, Marivic Ritual went
back to the RTC and met Gusilatar, the guard on duty at the time, who told her
he knew about the replacement of the shock of her motorcycle. She informed Ferreras of what was told to her
and the latter made his own investigation.
He found out that the tricycle of Eclipse was involved in an accident
before February 13, 2004 and its shock was damaged. He sometimes looked at the motorcycle of the
tricycle being used by Eclipse whenever said tricycle passed through the RTC,
particularly the rear right shock which he observed to have no damage.
With the
affidavit of said Gusilatar as his evidence, Ferreras, without getting the
conformity of his superior, Provincial Prosecutor Jesse Pimentel who was then
in Manila for an operation, filed a complaint for tampering of evidence against
Eclipse with the OPP and the instant administrative complaint. The highest official of the OPP tried to
influence him to withdraw the complaints but he refused. The complaint with the OPP was eventually
dismissed by one of the assistant provincial prosecutors allegedly for
insufficiency of evidence.
On November 4,
2004, before he has executed his affidavit about the replacement of the rear
right shock by Eclipse, Gusilatar, his cousin, Fidel Arcilla (Sheriff of the
OCC, RTC) and Leopoldo Cruz (Utility Worker I, Branch 96, RTC) were summoned by
Judge Yanga. At his office, Judge Yanga
charged Gusilatar with aiding Arcilla, against whom said Judge [had] filed an
administrative case and who, in turn, filed a counter-charge against said
Judge, by allegedly punching in Arcilla’s Daily Time Record (DTR) upon said
Arcilla’s bidding, and said punching was allegedly reported to said Judge by
Eclipse who saw the incident. Gusilatar
denied Judge Yanga’s charge and Leopoldo Cruz admitted he did it by mistake as
he thought it was his card, but Judge Yanga refused to believe said Leopoldo
Cruz and insisted on the guilt of Gusilatar.
Gusilatar’s employment was eventually terminated as Judge Yanga informed
the security agency about his alleged infractions of the said agency’s rules
and regulations.
As part of his
preparations for the complaint against Eclipse, Ferreras had the motorcycle
photographed by Rommel Gonzales, at the RTC building near the OPP and at Norkis
where the motorcycle was taken after its release by virtue of Judge Yanga’s
order. He also took possession of the
shock which was used to replace the rear right shock of the Yamaha RS 100
motorcycle of Marivic Ritual.
He presented the
following documentary evidence:
Exhibit “A” - “Sinumpaang Salaysay”
of Gerardo
and
submarkings Ferreras, dated
November 9, 2004, to prove that a certain blue RS 100 Yamaha motorcycle with
chassis and motor number 4PF214216 and bearing plate number RF-2658 was under
the custody of the OPP, that the rear right shock of the motorcycle was
replaced by Eclipse on February 13, 2004 at around 2:30 o’clock in the morning
and the incident was witnessed by Ronald Gusilatar, and as part of the
testimony of said Ferreras.
Exhibit “B” - “Sinumpaang Salaysay” of Ronald Gusilatar,
dated November 9, 2004, to prove that he was the guard on duty at the time
Eclipse replaced the rear right shock of the motorcycle, that he saw Eclipse
engage himself in some activities over the motorcycle for about ten minutes and
thereafter pass by his table with the shock inserted at his armpit.
Exhibit “C” - Relevant page of guard’s logbook and submarkings (certified photocopy
of page 266 the security
logbook indicating 0230 HRS. Mr. Eclipse
change right shock),
to prove that Eclipse replaced the rear
right shock of
the motorcycle at around 2:30 o’clock in
Exhibit “D” - Photographs of the motorcycle taken and
and submarkings authenticated in open
court by Rommel Gonzales, to
prove that the motorcycle depicted in
the photographs is the same
one
whose rear right shock was replaced by Eclipse, and as
part of the testimony
of
Rommel Gonzales.
Exhibit “E” - Order of Release of the said motorcycle,
and
submarkings dated September
10, 2004, issued
by then Executive
Judge Armando A.
Yanga,
to prove that the motorcycle was
indeed under the custody of the OPP at
the time of
the replacement of its rear right shock; that it was released from the custody
of the OPP on October 7, 2004 at around 3:00 o’clock in the afternoon, and as
part of the testimony of Ferreras.
Exhibit “F” - “Sinumpaang Salaysay”
of Marivic
and
submarkings Ritual y
Sindac, to prove that
Marivic
Ritual was
the owner of the motorcycle
when it
was released and
she noticed
the difference
in color of the rear right
shock with
the other shock
of the
motorcycle that
she conducted her own
inquiry
about said shock and she learned
about the
replacement by Eclipse
on
February
13, 2004 at 2:30 o’clock in the
morning.
Exhibit “G” - “Pasalungat na Sinumpaang Salaysay” of
Rudy Eclipse, dated May 31, 2005, to impeach the testimony of said Eclipse.
(Stated in paragraph 3 of the affidavit is that it is not true that he went to
the RTC building at 2:30 o’clock in the morning of February 13, 2004 because at
that time he was at his house sleeping).
VERSION OF THE
RESPONDENT
Respondent Eclipse
denied the charges of Ferreras. He
presented himself and RTC security guard Gilbert Glemao as his witnesses.
The respondent
testified that he became a Utility Worker I of Branch 66 of the RTC in 2001 and
that he usually goes to the RTC building at 4:00 o’clock in the morning to do
his janitorial work and never [goes] there earlier than a few minutes [before]
said time. He [knows] that Gusilatar
owns a tricycle colored blue with a Yamaha 100 RS as motorcycle.
On said February
13, 2004, when he went to the RTC building at 4:00 a.m., he met Gusilatar at
the door of the building. Gusilatar was
carrying something wrapped in newspaper which he placed in his tricycle. When he asked what it was, Gusilatar did not
answer. When he went to throw garbage at
a drum, he saw the newspaper-wrapped thing in his (Gusilatar’s) tricycle. He opened the newspaper wrapper and saw a
shock blue in color. On February 16,
2004, he verbally reported the incident to Judge Yanga who did not act on it.
On November 4,
2004, he saw Gusilatar take the DTR of Fidel Arcilla from the box on top of the
security guard table and punched it on the bundy clock. Present then was Leopoldo Cruz. He reported the incident to Judge Yanga and
on the same day, Judge Yanga called Gusilatar.
Before Christmas of 2004, Gusilatar ceased being [the] security guard of
the RTC building.
In December
2004, when Gusilatar was still a security guard, he received summons from the
Office of the Provincial Prosecutor and that was the time he came to know that
Ferreras filed a criminal charge for tampering of evidence against him, with
Gusilatar as one of his witnesses. He
executed a “Pasalungat na Salaysay” (counter-affidavit), dated May 31, 2005,
denying the charges because he was sleeping at his house when the shock was
allegedly replaced. He did not mention
in said counter-affidavit that the shock was taken by Gusilatar. He forgot about it as he was on May 31, 2005,
still grieving over the death of his father on September 21, 2004 for which
reason he went to their province on September 18, 2004 and stayed there for one
week.
In the complaint
against him at the OPP, he submitted the affidavit of Judge Yanga which
supported him. The complaint was
eventually dismissed by the OPP for insufficiency of evidence.
Respondent
Eclipse believes the charge was made by Ferreras in conspiracy with Gusilatar
and Arcilla, in order to have him dismissed from the service.
Security Guard
Glemao of the Combined Blue Dragon Security and Services, Inc. testified that
he was the security guard who took over from Gusilatar in the morning of
February 13, 2004. He did not see the
entry about the replacement of the shock on said date.
Glemao
testified, among others, that during the time that Judge Yanga was the
Executive Judge, the security guards of the building allowed Eclipse to enter
the RTC building even before 4:00 o’clock in the morning; that in November
2004, after Gusilatar was called by Judge Yanga about the Arcilla’s DTR
incident on November 4, 2004, Gusilatar informed [him] that he might be
terminated from the service by Judge Yanga because of the said DTR incident and
that Eclipse [had] replaced the shock of the motorcycle but he [did not make]
an entry about it in the logbook. Glemao
did not immediately look for the entry in the logbook as he did so only after
one hour had lapsed after Gusilatar left him.
Within the period that Guisilatar was with him, he did not see Gusilatar
make an entry in the logbook, which was kept in the big drawer of the security
guard’s table. However, when he looked
into the logbook after the said one hour, he saw the entry on February 13, 2004
about the replacement of the motorcycle shock.
Of the
documentary exhibits offered by the respondent, only the following was
admitted:
Exhibit
“1” - Memorandum of Preliminary
Investigation of the Office of
the Prosecutor of Aurora, to prove that Ferreras has conflicting statements on
the manner of his receipt of the motorcycle, subject matter of the complaint.
The affidavit of
Judge Yanga, who was the Executive Judge at the time of the replacement
incident, was not admitted because said Judge refused to be presented on the
witness stand in order to affirm and confirm the contents of his
affidavit. The respondent and his
counsel did not insist on the presentation of Judge Yanga.[11]
From
the above-stated facts, Executive Judge Soluren made the following findings and
recommendation:
It has been
established during the investigation of the instant complaint that Eclipse knew
that the motorcycle was submitted to the OPP as an evidence in a drug-related
case and should therefore have been left untouched and that he owned a tricycle
with a blue Yamaha RS 100 motorcycle on February 13, 2004, the time of the
motorcycle shock replacement incident.
He has been identified by a person (Gusilatar) who has seen him take the
rear right shock and replace it with a damaged one. The fact that the shock of the motorcycle was
replaced with a damaged one (and other parts were also taken) was established
by the testimonies of the owner (Marivic Ritual) and the seller (Eric Carillo)
of the subject motorcycle. That the
shock taken from the motorcycle was installed in the motorcycle of Eclipse
which was used by him after the incident in question was proven by Ferreras,
who looked at the motorcycle of Eclipse’s tricycle whenever the same passed the
RTC.
When Gusilatar
positively identified Eclipse as the person who took the new rear right shock
of the motorcycle and replaced it with a damaged one, such “positive identification
prevails over the denial” of the latter. x x x.
Against this
evidence of the complainant, those offered by the respondent are found wanting
as demonstrated by the following.
When charged
before the OPP for tampering of evidence, docketed as I.S. No. 2004-387,
Eclipse submitted Exhibit “G”, a “Pasalungat na Salaysay” (Counter-affidavit)
where he alleged, among others, that he did not commit the offense charged and
that at the said date and time, he was at his house sleeping. However, in the comment on this
administrative complaint, dated June 9, 2005, which he submitted to the Office
of the Court Administrator, he claimed that he [had] never gone to the RTC
building earlier than a “few minutes before 4:00 o’clock in the morning”; that
on February 13, 2004, date of the replacement of the rear motor shock, he saw
Gusilatar take some parts of the Yamaha RS 100 placed at the RTC building as an
evidence in a criminal case, wrapped them in newspaper and placed them inside
his (Gusilatar’s) tricycle which [had] the same painting and trademark as the
motorcycle exhibit, and that he verbally reported to then Executive Judge Yanga
the said taking of some parts of the motorcycle by Gusilatar on February 16,
2004, the next working day.
It is clear that
in the abovementioned counter-affidavit and comment, Eclipse made inconsistent
claims as in the counter-affidavit, he claimed to be sleeping at his house at
the time of the alleged replacement of the shock of the Yamaha motorcycle,
whereas in the comment, he saw Gusilatar take the parts of the Yamaha
motorcycle and even reported it to then Executive Judge Yanga on the next
working day. How could he see Gusilatar
if he was sleeping at his house, which [was] across the street, to the right
side of the RTC building after 2 or 3 houses away, with leafy mango trees
blocking the view? Definitely, he could
not. Moreover, if he did report the same
to Judge Yanga, why did the latter not do an investigation? Maybe it is because there was no such
report.
Eclipse averred
that he never entered the RTC building earlier than a few minutes before 4:00
o’clock in the morning. An examination
of the logbook, however, disclosed that Eclipse [had] on several dates entered
the RTC building earlier than just a few minutes before 4:00 o’clock in the
morning, such as on November 9, 2003 at 3:45 a.m., December 4, 2003 at 3:40
a.m.; February 16, 2004 at 3:45 a.m.; February 24, 2004 at 3:45 a.m.; March 17,
2004 at 3:35 a.m., June 6 and 25, 2004 at 3:30 a.m., June 28, 2004 at 3:25 a.m.,
August 6, 2004 at 3:00 a.m.; August 10, 2004 at 3:36 a.m., August 13, 2004 at
3:30 a.m., September 10 and 13, 2004 at 3:30 a.m., and October 20, 2004 at 3:10
a.m. Hence, there is a great possibility
that he went to the RTC building on February 13, 2004 at the time indicated
therein – 2:30 o’clock in the morning.
Eclipse
testified that he [had] reported the incident on the next working day to Judge
Yanga. Yet, he did not state this in the
counter-affidavit that he first submitted to the OPP on May 31, 2005. It is clear, therefore, that this is just an
afterthought and it probably was hatched when Judge Yanga executed and
submitted his affidavit to support him in the instant complaint. It is quite unfortunate that Judge Yanga
refused to testify before the undersigned in order to confirm/affirm the
affidavit he [had] executed in support of Eclipse. xxx It
is apparent to the undersigned that the defense of Eclipse during the investigation
of the instant complaint was patterned after the allegations stated in Judge
Yanga’s affidavit which was executed on June 15, 2005, more than a year after
the motorcycle shock incident.
Eclipse tried to
shatter the truthfulness of the entry made by Gusilatar about the replacement
of the shock on February 13, 2004 by claiming that the entry seemed to have
been only inserted as the ball pen used [had] ink which [was] darker than that
used in the other entries on the same page of the logbook and there [was] no
space between said entry and the one that immediately preceded it. Gusilatar satisfactorily explained that there
were several ball pens in the drawers of the security guard’s table which they
could use and he used one or two of the same, such that the ball pen which he
took from the drawer for the said entry about the shock could have been
different from the other ones he used for the other entries. A scrutiny of said entries by the undersigned
showed that the darker shade of the entry in question could have been caused by
the greater pressure exerted in writing it.
With respect to
the lack of space between the entries, there [were] also entries in the same
logbook wherein there were no spaces between the entries. These appear on the
same page 266 and among others, on pages 3,5,7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 16, 17, 19, 20,
23, 24,26, 35, 36, 41, 44; in the month of February 2004, on pages 214, 217,
225, 236, 260, 263, 267, 273, 287, 288, 291, 299, 314, 322, 326; and in the
month of March 2004, on pages 326, 330, 337, 338, 348, 349, 361, 363, 365, 370,
375, 379, 393 of the logbook. Hence, the
entry on February 13, 2004 is not an isolated case, which proves that it was
made on the date and time indicated therein.
Eclipse also
questioned the entry in the logbook made by Gusilatar at the end of his duty at
about 8:00 o’clock in the morning
wherein he wrote: “Remarks. Negative Reports”.
He [claims] that this entry means there were no untoward happenings in
the early morning of February 13, 2004 during Gusilatar’s duty, such as the
theft/replacement of the motorcycle shock.
This was adequately explained by Gusilatar when he testified that he did
not want the incoming security guard to scrutinize the logbook and see his
entry which might destroy his desire to “makikisama” with Eclipse and other
employees of the RTC. Considering the
reputation of Eclipse as being the cause of the dismissal of some security
guards, he could not be blamed in being careful not to antagonize said Eclipse.
Security guard
Gilbert Glemao, when presented as witness by Eclipse, testified that he
succeeded Gusilatar as security guard on February 13, 2004. However, Gusilatar did not tell him about the
replacement of shock incident. It was
only in November 2004, after Gusilatar was called by Judge Yanga to explain the
Arcilla’s DTR punching incident on November 4, 2004, that said Gusilatar told
him about the said shock replacement incident and his failure to enter the same
in the logbook and confided to him that he might be dismissed by Judge Yanga
because of the DTR incident.
Unfortunately, he did not immediately look in the logbook as he allowed
one hour to pass after Gusilatar left him before he did so. Within the time that Gusilatar was with him,
he did not see Gusilatar make an entry in the logbook, which was kept in the
big drawer of the security guard’s table.
However, when he looked into the logbook, he saw the entry on February
13, 2004 about the replacement of the motorcyclye shock. With such testimony, the fact that the entry
was made on February 13, 2004, as claimed by Gusilatar and seen in the logbook
could not be overturned.
Undaunted,
Eclipse averred that the charge was orchestrated by Ferreras, Gusilatar and
Fidel Arcilla in vengeance for his reporting them to then Executive Judge Yanga
regarding the alleged punching in of the time card of Arcilla by Gusilatar on
November 4, 2004. This seems
unbelievable as to the time the entry was made on February 13, 2004, the
incident of DTR punching [had] not yet happened. Furthermore, the undersigned [had] personal
knowledge even before the instant complaint was filed that it was not Gusilatar
who punched the card but Leopoldo Cruz, who did so by mistake, and this was
confirmed to her by said Leopoldo Cruz.
Yet, Eclipse and then Executive Judge Yanga made it appear to have been
committed by Gusilatar which led to said security guard’s termination of
service.
x x x x
As a last-ditch
attempt to have the complaint dismissed, Ferreras submitted to the undersigned
on December 1, 2005, an affidavit where he alleged, among others, that the
information given to him by Gusilatar could be tainted because the latter had
an axe to grind against Eclipse as he (Gusilatar) “believes that the latter
(Eclipse) was responsible in reporting to then Executive Judge Yanga that he
unlawfully punched the DTR of an employee of the RTC which set in motion an
investigation resulting to the separation of said Gusilatar from his
employment” and that the case was “a product of misunderstanding between me
(Ferreras) and Rudy Eclipse because prior to the filing of the same, me (sic)
had a shouting match within the premises of the RTC which was witnessed by some
employees”. He, however, admitted that
he made the affidavit without the assistance of his counsel, that the same was
prepared with the assistance of Assistant Provincial Prosecutor Jonald F.
Hernandez and Prosecutor Dante P. Sindac, both of whom are under their superior
who allegedly tried to convince him to withdraw the complaint.
x x x x
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
WHEREFORE, the
undersigned hereby reports that from the evidence and testimonies submitted
during the investigation of the complaint, there is no doubt that respondent
Rudy Eclipse has committed the act of dishonesty and/or grave misconduct when,
with felonious intent, he stole the new rear right shock of the Yamaha
motorcycle submitted to the OPP as evidence in a criminal case and replaced it
with a damaged one to prevent detection.
Much as the
undersigned would like to retain the respondent in the service as he is the
main provider for his family, she has no other recourse but to recommend the
DISMISSAL of respondent RUDY P. ECLIPSE because it is so provided by the
Revised Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service.[12]
Then
Court Administrator Christopher O. Lock, in his Memorandum dated July 19, 2006,
adopted the findings of Executive Judge Soluren and made the following
recommendation:
WHEREFORE,
premises considered, the undersigned respectfully recommends to the Honorable
Court that Rudy Eclipse, Utility Worker I, RTC, Branch 66, Baler, Aurora,
having been found guilty of grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the
best interest of the service, be DISMISSED from the service, with forfeiture of
all benefits, except accrued leave credits, and with prejudice to re-employment
in the government service or any of its subdivision, instrumentalities and
agencies, including government owned or controlled corporations.
After
our own evaluation of the record, and taking into account the report and
recommendations submitted by both the Investigating Judge and the OCA, we agree
with the conclusion reached by them that respondent is administratively guilty
of the offense charged.
When
the issue is the credibility of witnesses, the function of evaluating it is
primarily lodged in the investigating judge. The rule which concedes due
respect, and even finality, to the assessment of credibility of witnesses by
trial judges in civil and criminal cases where preponderance of evidence and
proof beyond reasonable doubt, respectively, are required, applies a fortiori to administrative cases where
the quantum of proof required is only substantial evidence. The investigating judge is in a better
position to pass judgment on the credibility of witnesses, having personally
heard them when they testified and observed their deportment and manner of
testifying.[13] We find no reason to depart from this rule.
In Loyao, Jr. v. Caube,[14]
the Court defined “misconduct” in this wise:
Misconduct is
defined as any unlawful conduct on the part of a person concerned in the
administration of justice prejudicial to the rights of the parties or to the
right determination of the cause. It
generally means wrongful, improper or unlawful conduct motivated by a
premeditated, obstinate or intentional purpose. The term, however, does not
necessarily imply corruption or criminal intent. On the other hand, the term
“gross” connotes something “out of all measure; beyond allowance; not to be
excused; flagrant; shameful.”
Dishonesty
has been defined as
“Intentionally making
a false statement in any material fact, or practicing or attempting to practice
any deception or fraud in securing his examination, registration, appointment
or promotion. It is also understood to imply a disposition to lie, cheat,
deceive, or defraud; untrustworthiness; lack of integrity; lack of honesty,
probity or integrity in principle; lack of fairness and straightforwardness;
disposition to defraud, deceive or betray.”[15]
With
the foregoing as yardstick, we find the act of respondent -- of taking off the
shock absorber of the motorcycle, which forms part of the prosecution’s
evidence without the knowledge of the evidence custodian or the owner, for
personal gain, and thereafter replacing the same with a damaged one to prevent
detection of the same -- to be constitutive of dishonesty and grave
misconduct. In Office of the Court Administrator v. Juan,[16]
we found respondent therein guilty of dishonesty and grave misconduct for
taking a CZ Pistol marked as an exhibit in a criminal case for parricide. Again, in Office
of the Court of Administrator v. Ferrer,[17]
we found a utility worker guilty of dishonesty and grave misconduct for the
loss of a .45 caliber pistol and three magazines with nine rounds of live
ammunition, which had been offered in evidence in a criminal case, despite the
court’s acceptance of his resignation.
The
Court reiterates the well-settled rule that a public office is a public
trust. Public officers and employees are
duty-bound to serve with the highest degree of responsibility, integrity,
loyalty, and efficiency and shall remain accountable to the people.
Persons involved in the administration of justice ought to live up to the
strictest standard of honesty and integrity in the public service. The conduct of personnel connected with the
courts should, at all times, be circumspect to preserve the integrity and
dignity of our courts of justice. As
forerunners in the administration of justice, they ought to live up to the
strictest standards of honesty and integrity, considering that their positions
primarily involve service to the public.[18]
Thus,
with two Justices taking no part in the decision of the case, the Court finds
the respondent guilty of dishonesty and grave misconduct. As the acts committed by respondent
constitute grave offenses under Section 23(a) and (c), Rule XIV of the Omnibus
Rules Implementing Book V of Executive Order No. 292 and Other Pertinent Civil
Service Laws, as amended by CSC Memorandum Circular No. 19, s. 1999, the
commensurate penalty of dismissal, even if committed for the first time, must
be meted out.
WHEREFORE, respondent Rudy P. Eclipse,
Utility Worker I, Regional Trial Court, Branch 66, Baler, Aurora, having been
found GUILTY of dishonesty and grave
misconduct, is DISMISSED from the
service effective immediately, with forfeiture of all retirement benefits,
except accrued leave credits, with prejudice to his reemployment in any branch
or instrumentality of the government, including government-owned and controlled
corporations.
SO ORDERED.
REYNATO
S. PUNO
Chief Justice
ANTONIO
T. CARPIO Associate
Justice |
RENATO C. CORONAAssociate
Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CONCHITA CARPIO MORALESAssociate
Justice |
PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR.Associate Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANTONIO
EDUARDO B. NACHURA Associate Justice |
TERESITA J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO Associate
Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ARTURO D. BRION Associate
Justice |
DIOSDADO M. PERALTA Associate Justice
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LUCAS P. BERSAMIN Associate Justice
|
MARIANO C. DEL CASTILLO Associate
Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ROBERTO A. ABAD
Associate
Justice |
MARTIN S. VILLARAMA, JR. Associate
Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JOSE P. PEREZ
Associate Justice
|
JOSE C. MENDOZA Associate Justice
|
[3] Id. at 5-6.
[4] Id. at 7.
[5] Id. at 8.
[6] Id. at 9.
[7] Id. at 19.
[8] Id. at 20-21.
[9] Id. at 30-31.
[10] Resolution dated October 12, 2005; rollo, p. 32.
[11] Report on Investigation and Recommendation, pp. 2-6.
[12] Id. at 8-12.
[13] Melecio v. Tan, A.M. No. MTJ-04-1566, August 22, 2005, 467 SCRA 474, 479-480.
[14] 450 Phil. 38, 46-47 (2003).
[15] Re: Spurious Certificate of Eligibility of Tessie G. Quires, Regional Trial Court, Office of the Clerk of Court, Quezon City, A.M. No. 05-5-268-RTC, May 4, 2006, 489 SCRA 349, 356.
[16] 478 Phil. 823 (2004).
[17] 347 Phil. 667 (1997).
[18] Chua v. Paas, A.M. No. P-05-1933, September 9, 2005, 469 SCRA 471, 477.