Republic
of the
Supreme
Court
SECOND DIVISION
|
THELMA T. BABANTE-CAPLES, Complainant, - versus – PHILBERT B. CAPLES,
Utility Worker II, Hall of Justice, Municipal Trial Court, Respondent. |
A.M.
No. HOJ-10-03
(Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No.
09-04-HOJ)
Present: CARPIO, J.,
Chairperson, NACHURA, PERALTA, ABAD, and MENDOZA, JJ. Promulgated: November 15, 2010 |
x------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
DECISION
NACHURA, J.:
In an Affidavit-Complaint[1]
dated March 5, 2009, Thelma T. Babante-Caples (complainant) charged her
husband, Philbert B. Caples (respondent), Utility Worker II, Hall of Justice, Municipal
Trial Court (MTC),
In
his Counter-Affidavit[2]
dated May 12, 2009, respondent vehemently denies all the allegations stated in
the complaint. He contends that the same are untrue, baseless, malicious, and
exaggerated.
The
Report[3]
dated October 5, 2009 of the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) recommended
that the complaint be referred to the Executive Judge of the Regional Trial
Court (RTC) of Abuyog,
In
a Resolution[4] dated
November 25, 2009, the Court referred the instant case to Judge Buenaventura A.
Pajaron (Judge Pajaron), Executive Judge, RTC, Abuyog,
Lengthy
hearings were conducted by Judge Pajaron, at which complainant and her
witnesses Pedro A. Caducoy, Jr. and Francisco Cadion Daro, Jr. testified in
support of the complaint. On the other hand, counsel for respondent manifested
that respondent was not willing to testify, and waived his right to present
evidence because respondent already submitted his resignation letter to the OCA.
The testimonies of the witnesses are summarized as
follows.
Complainant,
39 years old, married, and a public school teacher, narrated that she is the
legal wife of respondent and that they have two (2) legitimate children. She stated
that their happy and blissful marriage was shattered because of the infidelity
of respondent, who had an illicit relationship with one Rennalyn Cordovez.[5] She
further narrated that the affair of the two has become public knowledge in
their community, and the public display of their immorality has caused so much
pain to her and to their children.
On
February 6, 2008, complainant pleaded with her philandering husband, who had a
drinking session with his paramour in a nearby videoke house, to stop his
immoral conduct. She stated that, instead of heeding her plea, respondent
physically assaulted her by slapping her face several times. As if the beating
he inflicted on complainant was not enough, respondent left the conjugal
dwelling on March 18, 2008 to join his mistress Rennalyn Cordovez in Dulag,
On
April 14, 2008, complainant sought the assistance of the MTC Judge of
Pedro
A. Caducoy, Jr., 25 years old, married, and a barangay tanod of Barangay Palale, MacArthur, Leyte, testified that
he personally knows respondent because his house is located 10 meters away from
the conjugal home of complainant and respondent; that he personally knows Rennalyn
Cordovez because she is also a resident of Barangay Palale, and his house is
located 15 meters away from her house; that in December 2007, he saw respondent
enter the compound of Rennalyn Cordovez on board a motorcycle at eleven o’clock
in the evening; that he saw Rennalyn Cordovez standing outside the gate and
holding a cellphone before respondent would enter the compound, which happened
several times; and that there is a street light located in front of the gate of
the compound.
Francisco
Cadion Dado, Jr. testified that, when he visited his aunt in Tolosa,
Respondent
manifested through his counsel that he would not testify; thus, the Investigating
Judge considered respondent to have waived his right to present evidence on his
behalf. Respondent was given the opportunity to be heard and refute the charges
against him by adducing evidence; yet, he chose not to testify and adduce evidence.
Instead, respondent tendered his resignation letter to the OCA of the Supreme
Court.
The Investigating
Judge averred that he proceeded to receive further evidence because, in Faelden v. Lagura,[6] we
held that “where the resignation of a court employee has not been acted upon,
he remains an employee of the judiciary.”
On
the basis of the foregoing findings, Judge Pajaron recommended that respondent
be dismissed from the service.
In administrative
proceedings, only substantial evidence,[7] i.e., that
amount of relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
support a conclusion, is required. The standard of substantial evidence is
satisfied when there is reasonable ground to believe that the person indicted
was responsible for the alleged wrongdoing or misconduct.
We find Judge Pajaron’s
findings to be in order ― a result of a meticulous and dispassionate analysis
of the testimonies. But we modify the
penalty to be imposed.
Immoral
conduct is conduct which is “willful, flagrant, or shameless, and which shows a
moral indifference to the opinion of the good and respectable members of the
community.”[8] In several cases,[9] we have ruled that
abandonment of one’s wife and children, and cohabitation with a woman not his
wife, constitutes immoral conduct that is subject to disciplinary action.
Respondent’s act of maintaining an
illicit relationship with a woman not his wife comes within the purview of disgraceful and immoral conduct, defined and
punished in Section 46(b)(5) of Subtitle A, Title I, Book V of the Administrative
Code of 1987. The disciplinary authority may impose the penalty of removal
from the service, demotion in rank, suspension for not more than one year
without pay, fine in an amount not exceeding his salary for six months, or
reprimand.
Under the Revised Uniform Rules on
Administrative Cases in the Civil Service Commission, adopted and approved by the
Civil Service Commission in its Resolution No. 991936 dated August 31, 1999,
disgraceful and immoral conduct is a grave offense which merits a penalty of
suspension for six (6) months and one (1) day to one (1) year for the first
offense, and the penalty of dismissal for the second offense.
In Ecube-Badel v. Badel,[10]
this Court suspended a court employee for one (1) year for having illicit
relations with another woman not his wife with whom he begot a child.
In a recent case, Alberto R.
Elape, Process Server, was suspended for six (6) months and one (1) day for
maintaining an illicit relationship.[11]
The penalty of dismissal recommended
by the Investigating Judge can no longer be imposed since respondent resigned from
the judiciary on February 23, 2010. However,
his resignation from office does not render the present administrative case
moot and academic. Neither does it free him from liability. The resignation of a public servant does not
preclude the finding of administrative liability to which he or she shall still
be answerable.[12] Complainant filed the case before respondent
resigned from office. Cessation from office because of resignation does not
warrant the dismissal of the administrative complaint filed against him while
he was still in the service.[13]
Under the circumstances, we deem it
reasonable to impose the penalty of a fine in the amount of P30,000.00
to be deducted from his accrued leave credits, if sufficient. If not, then he should be required to pay the
amount of P30,000.00.
Time and again, we have stressed adherence to the principle that public
office is a public trust. The good of the service and the degree of morality,
which every official and employee in the public service must observe, if
respect and confidence are to be maintained by the Government in the
enforcement of the law, demand that no untoward conduct affecting morality,
integrity, and efficiency while holding office should be left without proper
and commensurate sanction, all attendant circumstances taken into account.
WHEREFORE, respondent Philbert B. Caples
is found GUILTY of Immorality, and
is ordered to pay a FINE in the amount of Thirty Thousand
Pesos (P30,000.00) to be deducted from his accrued leave credits, if
sufficient. Otherwise, he shall pay the
amount of P30,000.00 directly to this Court.
Let a copy of this Decision be filed
in the personal record of respondent.
SO ORDERED.
ANTONIO
EDUARDO B. NACHURA
Associate
Justice
WE CONCUR:
ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Associate
Justice
Chairperson
|
DIOSDADO M. PERALTA Associate
Justice |
ROBERTO A. ABAD Associate
Justice |
JOSE CATRAL
Associate
Justice
[1] Rollo, pp. 1-4.
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5] Also referred to as Renalyn
Cordoves in some parts of the Investigation, Report, and Recommendation.
[6] A.M. No. P-05-1977, October 9,
2007, 535 SCRA 245.
[7] Dadulo v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 175451, April 13, 2007, 521 SCRA 357.
[8] Cojuangco, Jr. v. Atty. Palma, 481 Phil. 646, 656 (2004).
[9] Sealana-Abbu v. Laurenciana-Huraño, A.M. No. P-05-2091, August 28, 2007, 531 SCRA 289; Dela Torre-Yadao v. Cabanatan, A.M. Nos. P-05-1953 and P-05-1954, June 8, 2005, 459 SCRA 332, 338, citing Maguad v. De Guzman, 365 Phil. 12, 19 (1999); Lauro v. Lauro, 411 Phil. 12, 17 (2001); Bucatcat v. Bucatcat, 380 Phil. 555, 566-567 (2000).
[10] 339 Phil. 510, 516 (1997).
[11] Elape v. Elape, A.M. No. P-08-2431, April 16, 2008, 551 SCRA 403.
[12] Pagano v. Nazarro, Jr., G.R. No. 149072, September 21, 2007, 533 SCRA 622.
[13] Cabarloc v. Judge Cabusora, 401 Phil.
376, 385 (2000).