Lawyerly

AM No. P-08-2542

2008-11-28

NACHURA, J.

In Re: Memorandum dated Sept. 27, 1999 of Ma. Corazon M. Molo, OIC, Office of the Administrative Services, Office of the Court Administrator,[15] it was held:No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness from the occupant than the judicial office. Those connected with the dispensation of justice bear a heavy burden of responsibility. 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. This Court has consistently held that persons involved in the administration of justice ought to live up to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity in the public service. The conduct required of court personnel, from the presiding judge to the lowliest clerk, must always be beyond reproach.

AM NO. P-06-2167

2006-06-27

JUDGE PLENIO B. DELA PEÑA v. ROGELIO A. SIA

PER CURIAM

The failure of a clerk of court to turn over funds in his possession and adequately explain and present evidence thereon constitutes gross dishonesty, grave misconduct, and even malversation of public funds which this Court will never countenance, as these offenses indubitably diminish the faith of the people in the Judiciary.[20] We are thus left with no choice but to declare the respondent guilty of dishonesty and gross misconduct.[21] Dishonesty alone, being in the nature of a grave offense, carries the extreme penalty of dismissal from the service with forfeiture of retirement benefits, except accrued leave credits, and perpetual disqualification for reemployment in the government service. Dishonesty has no place in the Judiciary.[22]

AM NO. P-06-2140

2006-06-26

RE: REPORT ON FINANCIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN MTCC-OCC

PER CURIAM

In the case of Navallo v. Sandiganbayan,[17] we held that an accountable officer may be convicted of malversation even in the absence of direct proof of misappropriation as long as there is evidence of shortage in his accounts which he is unable to explain. Even the fact that respondent fully paid her shortages will not free her from the consequences of her wrongdoing.[18] Respondent's restitution of the whole amount of P605,025.00, will not erase her (respondent's) administrative culpability. By her reprehensible act of gross dishonesty, respondent has undermined the public's faith in our courts and, ultimately, in the administration of justice.[19]

AM NO. 05-8-233-MTC

2006-01-31

RE: FINAL REPORT ON FINANCIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED AT MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT OF MIDSAYAP

PER CURIAM

No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness from the occupant than does the judicial office. [16] The safekeeping of funds and collections is essential to the goal of an orderly administration of justice and no protestation of good faith can override the mandatory nature of the Circulars designed to promote full accountability for government funds. The failure to remit the funds in due time constitutes gross dishonesty and gross misconduct and even malversation of funds which cannot be countenanced by the Court for they diminish the faith of the people in the Judiciary. [17] The act of misappropriating judiciary funds constitutes dishonesty and grave misconduct which are grave offenses punished by dismissal [18] even if committed for the first time. [19]

AM NO. P-05-1966

2005-10-20

OCA v. MELECIO T. RAMOS

SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.

Corollarily, in Re: Ma. Corazon M. Molo,[6] we held:"No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness from the occupant than the judicial office. Those connected with the dispensation of justice bear a heavy burden of responsibility. 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. This Court has consistently held that persons involved in the administration of justice ought to live up to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity in the public service. The conduct required of court personnel, from the presiding judge to the lowliest clerk, must always be beyond reproach.

AM NO. 05-2-41-MTC

2005-09-30

RE: REPORT ON FINANCIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT

CARPIO, J.

No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness from the occupant than a judicial office. Those connected with the dispensation of justice bear a heavy burden of responsibility. 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. The conduct required of court personnel, from the presiding judge to the lowliest clerk, must always be beyond reproach and circumscribed with a heavy burden of responsibility. As front-liners in the administration of justice, they should live up to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity.[4]

AM NO. 04-8-195-MCTC

2005-08-18

RE: FINANCIAL AUDIT ON ACCOUNTABILITIES OF MR. RESTITUTO A. TABUCON

CARPIO, J.

No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness from the occupant than a judicial office. Those entrusted with the dispensation of justice bear a heavy burden of responsibility. Clerks of Court in particular must be individuals of honesty, probity and competence, charged as they are with safeguarding the integrity of the court and its proceedings. The conduct of court personnel, from the highest magistrate to the lowliest clerk, must always be beyond reproach. As sentinels in the administration of justice, they should live up to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity.[6]

AM NO. 02-8-198-METC

2005-06-08

RE: CRIMINAL CASE NO. MC-02-5637 v. PERALTA

PER CURIAM

Corollarily, in Re: Ma. Corazon M. Molo,[12] we held:"No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness from the occupant than the judicial office. Those connected with the dispensation of justice bear a heavy burden of responsibility. 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. This Court has consistently held that persons involved in the administration of justice ought to live up to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity in the public service. The conduct required of court personnel, from the presiding judge to the lowliest clerk, must always be beyond reproach.

AM NO. P-98-1281

2005-04-27

OCA v. SYLVIA R. YAN

PER CURIAM

Grave Misconduct 1st Offense Dismissal" Corollarily, in Re: Ma. Corazon M. Molo,[9] we held: "No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness from the occupant than the judicial office. Those connected with the dispensation of justice bear a heavy burden of responsibility. 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. This Court has consistently held that persons involved in the administration of justice ought to live up to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity in the public service. The conduct required of court personnel, from the presiding judge to the lowliest clerk, must always be beyond reproach.

AM NO. P-03-1708

2005-02-16

ATTY. JOSE R. ORTIZ v. LARRY DE GUZMAN

PER CURIAM

The respondent's refusal to face the charges against him head-on is contrary to the principle in criminal law that the first impulse of an innocent man, when accused of wrongdoing, is to express his innocence at the first opportune time.[15] For his silence and inaction can easily be misinterpreted as a defiance to the directives issued, or worse, an admission of guilt.

AM No. 02-1-66-RTC

2004-08-19

RE: REPORT ON FINANCIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN RTC

PER CURIAM

The Employees Leave Division, Office of Administrative Services, OCA, is likewise DIRECTED to compute the balance of Atty. Marron's earned leave credits and forward the same to the Finance Division, Fiscal Management Office, OCA, which shall compute its monetary value. The amount, as well as other benefits he may be entitled to shall be applied as restitution of the shortage.[8]

	AM No. P-08-2542 2008-11-28	OCA v. CYRIL JOTIC NACHURA, J.
In Re: Memorandum dated Sept. 27, 1999 of Ma. Corazon M. Molo, OIC, Office of the Administrative Services, Office of the Court Administrator,[15] it was held:No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness from the occupant than the judicial office. Those connected with the dispensation of justice bear a heavy burden of responsibility. 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. This Court has consistently held that persons involved in the administration of justice ought to live up to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity in the public service. The conduct required of court personnel, from the presiding judge to the lowliest clerk, must always be beyond reproach.
	AM NO. P-06-2167 2006-06-27	JUDGE PLENIO B. DELA PEÑA v. ROGELIO A. SIA PER CURIAM
The failure of a clerk of court to turn over funds in his possession and adequately explain and present evidence thereon constitutes gross dishonesty, grave misconduct, and even malversation of public funds which this Court will never countenance, as these offenses indubitably diminish the faith of the people in the Judiciary.[20] We are thus left with no choice but to declare the respondent guilty of dishonesty and gross misconduct.[21] Dishonesty alone, being in the nature of a grave offense, carries the extreme penalty of dismissal from the service with forfeiture of retirement benefits, except accrued leave credits, and perpetual disqualification for reemployment in the government service. Dishonesty has no place in the Judiciary.[22]
	AM NO. P-06-2140 2006-06-26	RE: REPORT ON FINANCIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN MTCC-OCC PER CURIAM
In the case of Navallo v. Sandiganbayan,[17] we held that an accountable officer may be convicted of malversation even in the absence of direct proof of misappropriation as long as there is evidence of shortage in his accounts which he is unable to explain. Even the fact that respondent fully paid her shortages will not free her from the consequences of her wrongdoing.[18] Respondent's restitution of the whole amount of P605,025.00, will not erase her (respondent's) administrative culpability. By her reprehensible act of gross dishonesty, respondent has undermined the public's faith in our courts and, ultimately, in the administration of justice.[19]
	AM NO. 05-8-233-MTC 2006-01-31	RE: FINAL REPORT ON FINANCIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED AT MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT OF MIDSAYAP PER CURIAM
No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness from the occupant than does the judicial office. [16] The safekeeping of funds and collections is essential to the goal of an orderly administration of justice and no protestation of good faith can override the mandatory nature of the Circulars designed to promote full accountability for government funds. The failure to remit the funds in due time constitutes gross dishonesty and gross misconduct and even malversation of funds which cannot be countenanced by the Court for they diminish the faith of the people in the Judiciary. [17] The act of misappropriating judiciary funds constitutes dishonesty and grave misconduct which are grave offenses punished by dismissal [18] even if committed for the first time. [19]
	AM NO. P-05-1966 2005-10-20	OCA v. MELECIO T. RAMOS SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.
Corollarily, in Re: Ma. Corazon M. Molo,[6] we held:"No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness from the occupant than the judicial office. Those connected with the dispensation of justice bear a heavy burden of responsibility. 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. This Court has consistently held that persons involved in the administration of justice ought to live up to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity in the public service. The conduct required of court personnel, from the presiding judge to the lowliest clerk, must always be beyond reproach.
	AM NO. 05-2-41-MTC 2005-09-30	RE: REPORT ON FINANCIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT CARPIO, J.
No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness from the occupant than a judicial office. Those connected with the dispensation of justice bear a heavy burden of responsibility. 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. The conduct required of court personnel, from the presiding judge to the lowliest clerk, must always be beyond reproach and circumscribed with a heavy burden of responsibility. As front-liners in the administration of justice, they should live up to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity.[4]
	AM NO. 04-8-195-MCTC 2005-08-18	RE: FINANCIAL AUDIT ON ACCOUNTABILITIES OF MR. RESTITUTO A. TABUCON CARPIO, J.
No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness from the occupant than a judicial office. Those entrusted with the dispensation of justice bear a heavy burden of responsibility. Clerks of Court in particular must be individuals of honesty, probity and competence, charged as they are with safeguarding the integrity of the court and its proceedings. The conduct of court personnel, from the highest magistrate to the lowliest clerk, must always be beyond reproach. As sentinels in the administration of justice, they should live up to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity.[6]
	AM NO. 02-8-198-METC 2005-06-08	RE: CRIMINAL CASE NO. MC-02-5637 v. PERALTA PER CURIAM
Corollarily, in Re: Ma. Corazon M. Molo,[12] we held:"No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness from the occupant than the judicial office. Those connected with the dispensation of justice bear a heavy burden of responsibility. 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. This Court has consistently held that persons involved in the administration of justice ought to live up to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity in the public service. The conduct required of court personnel, from the presiding judge to the lowliest clerk, must always be beyond reproach.
	AM NO. P-98-1281 2005-04-27	OCA v. SYLVIA R. YAN PER CURIAM
Grave Misconduct 1st Offense Dismissal" Corollarily, in Re: Ma. Corazon M. Molo,[9] we held: "No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness from the occupant than the judicial office. Those connected with the dispensation of justice bear a heavy burden of responsibility. 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. This Court has consistently held that persons involved in the administration of justice ought to live up to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity in the public service. The conduct required of court personnel, from the presiding judge to the lowliest clerk, must always be beyond reproach.
	AM NO. P-03-1708 2005-02-16	ATTY. JOSE R. ORTIZ v. LARRY DE GUZMAN PER CURIAM
The respondent's refusal to face the charges against him head-on is contrary to the principle in criminal law that the first impulse of an innocent man, when accused of wrongdoing, is to express his innocence at the first opportune time.[15] For his silence and inaction can easily be misinterpreted as a defiance to the directives issued, or worse, an admission of guilt.
	AM No. 02-1-66-RTC 2004-08-19	RE: REPORT ON FINANCIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN RTC PER CURIAM
The Employees Leave Division, Office of Administrative Services, OCA, is likewise DIRECTED to compute the balance of Atty. Marron's earned leave credits and forward the same to the Finance Division, Fiscal Management Office, OCA, which shall compute its monetary value. The amount, as well as other benefits he may be entitled to shall be applied as restitution of the shortage.[8]

REPORT ON FINANCIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED AT MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS OF BANI