A.M. No. 96-10-380-RTC November 18, 1997
REPORT OF JUSTICE FELIPE B. KALALO, Regional Coordinator, J.P.D.I.O. ON THE AUDIT CONDUCTED IN THE COURTS OF RIZAL PROVINCE

FACTS

This administrative matter originated from an audit report by retired Justice Felipe B. Kalalo on the courts of Rizal Province, revealing irregularities in the handling of the Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) and Fiduciary Fund. The Court en banc, in a January 21, 1997 Resolution, ordered a detailed audit by the Fiscal Audit Division of specific courts, placed several court personnel under preventive suspension, and required explanations from others for various infractions. The audit confirmed discrepancies. For instance, in the MTC of Cardona, Clerk of Court Ermelina C. Bernardino had delayed remittances of JDF collections. In the MCTC of Pililia-Jala-Jala, Clerk of Court Libertad San Juan had commingled General Fund collections with JDF. At the RTC in Morong, Clerk of Court Atty. Myrna Directo and Deputy Sheriff Restituto Soriano deposited JDF collections in a private bank. Separately, Judge Ricardo P. Angeles of the MCTC of Teresa-Baras failed to decide twenty-two criminal cases within the reglementary period.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the court personnel and judge are administratively liable for their respective failures in handling court funds and deciding cases promptly.

RULING

The Court found administrative liability. For the clerks of court and cashier involved in the fund irregularities (Bernardino, San Juan, Banting, and Tuazon), the audit reports were treated as formal administrative complaints, and they were ordered to submit their comments. Their preventive suspension remained pending further proceedings. The legal logic is that clerks of court are accountable officers and custodians of court funds; their failure to remit collections promptly and properly, or their commingling of funds, constitutes gross neglect of duty and undermines public trust in the judiciary’s financial integrity. For Atty. Directo and Sheriff Soriano, the Court imposed fines—P5,000 and P2,000, respectively—and lifted their suspension. Their act of depositing JDF in a private bank, while earning interest for the fund, violated circulars mandating deposit in authorized government depositories. The penalty was mitigated because the funds were not misappropriated and the interest was accounted for, but the violation of clear rules warranted a financial penalty as a deterrent. For Judge Angeles, the Court issued a reprimand. Judges have a mandatory duty to decide cases within the period fixed by law; failure to do so constitutes inefficiency and neglect of duty. The Court emphasized that he could have sought an extension, making his inaction inexcusable. The reprimand serves as a warning, with more severe consequences for repetition.