G.R. No. A.M. No. P-22-063 (formerly OCA IPI NO. 18-4860-P) February 07, 2023
Hon. Irene B. Banzuela-Didulo, Complainant, vs. Ma. Lorda M. Santizo, Clerk of Court II, Municipal Trial Court, San Joaquin, Iloilo, Respondent.

FACTS

Ma. Lorda M. Santizo, Clerk of Court II of the MTC of San Joaquin, Iloilo, was previously relieved from her authority to handle court funds from September 8, 2016, due to her failure to submit monthly financial reports. A financial audit for April 1, 2007, to July 31, 2016, revealed shortages totaling ₱94,562.80 in various court funds. Although she restituted the shortages and paid interests for delayed deposits, she was reinstated in October 2017 with a stern warning.
Barely five months after her reinstatement, complainant Judge Irene B. Banzuela-Didulo discovered new violations and filed a letter-complaint dated August 30, 2018, requesting Santizo’s immediate relief. The charges included: (1) delayed deposit of a ₱2,000 cash bond; (2) delayed deposit of a ₱2,000 fine; (3) collecting a ₱2,000 fine without issuing an official receipt; (4) falsifying the signature of bondsman Raymundo Cordero on an acknowledgment receipt during the release of a ₱24,000 cash bond; and (5) failure to release collected amounts to a plaintiff as ordered.
The Court consolidated this complaint with an administrative matter (A.M. No. 18-09-85-MTC) concerning the request for her relief. A subsequent financial audit confirmed the prior shortages and found new irregularities: (1) irregular use and cancellation of official receipts for different funds; and (2) tampering of official receipts, specifically OR No. 0507551 and OR No. 5752810. The audit team recommended filing criminal charges and issuing a hold departure order against Santizo. The Court adopted these recommendations, and the Office of the Court Administrator filed a criminal complaint with the Ombudsman, which found probable cause for malversation and falsification.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Ma. Lorda M. Santizo is administratively liable for Gross Neglect of Duty, Grave Misconduct, and Dishonesty.

RULING

Yes, respondent Ma. Lorda M. Santizo is administratively liable for Gross Neglect of Duty, Grave Misconduct, and Dishonesty. The Court found her guilty of these charges based on substantial evidence, including the audit findings and her own admissions. The audit revealed tampering with official receipts and irregularities in handling court funds, which constitute dishonesty and grave misconduct. Her failure to promptly deposit court collections and submit required reports, despite a previous infraction and warning, constitutes gross neglect of duty. The Court emphasized the high degree of responsibility required of clerks of court in handling court funds. Considering the gravity of the offenses and her recidivism, the Court imposed the penalty of dismissal from service, with forfeiture of all retirement benefits (except accrued leave credits) and perpetual disqualification from reemployment in any government agency.