EN
BANC
JUDGE
ISAIAS P. DICDICAN,
Complainant,
A. M. No. P-96-1231
February 12, 1997
-versus-
RUSSO
FERNAN, JR., Clerk III
and RAMIELA BOHOLST-EGOS, Clerk III,
Respondents.
D
E C I S I O N
PER CURIAM:
Before Us is an
administrative complaint initiated
by Judge Isaias P. Dicdican, Branch XI, Regional Trial Court [RTC] of
Cebu
City against respondents Russo Fernan, Jr., Clerk III of the same
court,
and Mrs. Raniela Josefa Boholst-Egos, Clerk III, Office of the Clerk of
Court, RTC, Cebu City for disgraceful and immoral conduct.
The facts are
undisputed.cralaw:red
In the morning of
August 24, 1996, a Saturday,
complainant Judge Dicdican and his wife, after attending a wedding,
decided
to pass by the former's office at Branch XI, RTC, Cebu City, located at
the second floor of the Palace of Justice.cralaw:red
When the couple
reached the entrance of complainant's
office, complainant noticed that the door of his personnel's office was
not padlocked as was usually done. Sensing that someone could be inside
the office, complainant, accompanied by his wife, pushed the door and
discovered
it was bolted from inside. Using his own set of keys, complainant
managed
to open the door and enter the room. Inside the room, he saw a naked
man
spring from the sofa near the office table and run towards another
table,
trying to seek cover. The man left his shirt and shorts on the floor,
near
the sofa. Complainant recognized him to be respondent Russo S. Fernan,
Jr., a clerk in his office who is in charge of the records of criminal
cases in his sala.cralaw:red
Complainant
approached the sofa where respondent
Fernan came from. While walking towards the sofa, he noticed another
person
under an adjacent table who was trying to reach out for a jumper and
t-shirt
on top of the table. Complainant asked respondent Fernan who his
companion
was. Respondent identified his companion as "Didi" who turned out to be
respondent Mrs. Raniela Boholst-Egos, Clerk III in the Office of the
Clerk
of Court, RTC Cebu City, and assigned at the RTC Library, located at
the
third floor of the Palace of Justice.cralaw:red
Complainant asked
respondent Fernan what was happening
and the latter replied: "Nasapnan lang gayud, Judge" ["We were
just
caught, Judge"]. Complainant then requested his wife to summon other
people
who could serve as witnesses to the scene. Among those who responded
were
Provincial Guard, Alfredo Abella, assigned to guard the Palace of
Justice,
Henry Espinosa, supervisor of the maintenance personnel of the Palace
of
Justice, utility workers Ariel Momongan and Ignacio Candones, plumber
Quirino
Alberia, and janitors Celso Miano and Ike Tunacao. They all saw
respondent
Fernan behind a table, still naked, and respondent Egos hiding under
another
table. Respondent Fernan, Jr. was pleading to complainant: "Please
Judge,
sakto na Judge" [Please Judge, enough Judge].[1]
Complainant replied: "Dili ko gusto nga ang akong korte himoong
motel"
[I would not want my court to be transformed into a motel].[2]
Complainant then asked all the parties to vacate the office.[3]
After reducing
his statement and those of his
witnesses in writing, complainant judge endorsed his complaint and his
witnesses' Affidavits to Executive Judge Priscila S. Agana for
appropriate
action.[4]
In the meantime,
respondent Fernan tendered his
resignation to complainant judge, effective August 26, 1996, allegedly
due to health reasons.[5]
The next day, respondent Egos filed her resignation, citing "personal
reasons"
for the filing.[6]
Executive Judge
Agana was directed by Deputy Court
Administrator Bernardo P. Abesamis to conduct an immediate
investigation
of the incident. However, since the mother-in-law of respondent Egos
was
employed in the office of Executive Judge Agana, the latter inhibited
herself
and delegated the task of investigating the matter to Judge Leonardo
Canares,
Branch X, RTC of Cebu City.[7]
Pursuant to said
Order, Judge Canares summoned
the parties and their witnesses to appear and testify before him about
the administrative complaint. Respondents were further directed to
submit
their Counter-Affidavits.[8]
However, on the scheduled date of hearing, only complainant judge and
his
witnesses appeared.cralaw:red
In his
Investigation Report,[9]
Judge Canares, relying on the uncontroverted evidence of the
complainant
and his witnesses, found respondents guilty of disgraceful and immoral
conduct.cralaw:red
Deputy Court
Administrator Abesamis affirmed the
findings of investigating Judge Canares and recommended that
respondents
be dismissed from service, with forfeiture of all benefits and with
prejudice
to re-employment in any branch of government.[10]
It bears emphasis
that the image of a court of
justice is mirrored in the conduct, official and otherwise, of the
personnel
who work thereat, from the judge to the lowest of its personnel. Court
employees have been enjoined to adhere to the exacting standards of
morality
and decency in their professional and private conduct in order to
preserve
the good name and integrity of the courts of justice.cralaw:red
In the case at
bar, We are in full agreement with
the findings of fact of the Investigating Judge and the recommendation
of Deputy Court Administrator Abesamis. The records confirm without
doubt
the guilt of respondent-employees. The allegations of complainant in
his
Affidavit and the statements of his witnesses regarding the incident
remain
unrebutted. Despite receipt of the notice of hearing of the
administrative
complaint filed against them, respondents did not appear at the
investigation
or submit their counter-affidavits. Instead, two [2] days after their
sexual
indiscretion, respondents successively tendered their resignation from
the judiciary. Nonetheless, their submission of resignation would not
serve
to exculpate them for non-acceptance of their resignation renders the
same
ineffective and inoperative.[11]
To be sure, respondents' failure to answer the charges without valid
reason
and their precipitate resignation from service are indubitable indicia
of guilt. From the evidence on record, We thus find that complainant
had
sufficiently established his charge of immorality against respondents.cralaw:red
Hence,
respondents' reprehensible acts of maintaining
an illicit relationship with each other, both of whom having their own
separate family, and audaciously engaging in sexual congress inside the
court personnel's office, amount to disgraceful and immoral conduct, a
grave offense, which warrants a severe administrative penalty.cralaw:red
In the light of
uncontroverted evidence on record,
respondents RUSSO FERNAN, JR. and RAMIELA BOHOLST-EGOS, Clerks III, are
hereby found guilty of DISGRACEFUL and IMMORAL CONDUCT and meted the
penalty
of dismissal from the service, effective immediately, with forfeiture
of
all retirement benefits and accrued leave credits and with prejudice to
re-employment in any branch or instrumentality of the government,
including
government-owned or controlled corporations. Let a copy of this
Decision
be appended to respondents' 201 files.cralaw:red
SO ORDERED.cralaw:red
Narvasa, C.J.,
Padilla, Regalado, Davide,
Jr., Romero, Bellosillo, Melo, Puno, Vitug, Kapunan, Mendoza,
Francisco,
Hermosisima, Jr., Panganiban and Torres, Jr., JJ., concur.cralaw:red
____________________________________
Endnotes
[1]
Joint Affidavit of Celso Miano and Ike Tunacao; Original Records, p. 14.
[2]
Affidavit of Henry Espinosa; Original Records, p. 16.
[3]
Affidavit-Complaint of Judge Dicdican; Original Records, p. 11.
[4]
First Indorsement dated August 28, 1996; Original Records, p. 10.
[5]
Original Records, p. 19.
[6]
Id., p. 18.
[7]
Memorandum Order, Original Record, p. 9.
[8]
Order dated August 30, 1996; Original Records, pp. 7-8.
[9]
Original Records, pp. 3-5.
[10]
Rollo, pp. 1-2.
[11]
Tadeo v. Daquiz, Adm. Matter No. P-91-650, July 21, 1993, 224 SCRA 656;
Pardo v. Cunanan, A. M. No. P-87-73, September 1, 1995, 248 SCRA 1. |