July 2008 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2008 > July 2008 Resolutions >
[A.M. No. P-99-1347 ( Formerly OCA I.P.I. Nos. 99-399 and 98-422-P) : July 29, 2008] IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR JUDICIAL CLEMENCY: INOCENTES M. MONTEROLA II, CLERK OF COURT II, MUNICIPALITY CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT, JABONGA-KITCHARAO, AGUSAN DEL NORTE, PETITIONER :
[A.M. No. P-99-1347 ( Formerly OCA I.P.I. Nos. 99-399 and 98-422-P) : July 29, 2008]
IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR JUDICIAL CLEMENCY: INOCENTES M. MONTEROLA II, CLERK OF COURT II, MUNICIPALITY CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT, JABONGA-KITCHARAO, AGUSAN DEL NORTE, PETITIONER
Sirs/Mesdames:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of the Court En Banc dated July 29, 2008
"A.M. No. P-99-1347 (Formerly OCA I.P.I. Nos. 99-399 and 98-422-P) � In the matter of the Petition for Judicial Clemency: Inocentes M. Monterola II, Clerk of Court II, Municipality Circuit Trial Court, Jabonga-Kitcharao, Agusan del Norte, Petitioner.
Before the Court Petition for Judicial Clemency filed by Inocentes M. Monterola (Monterola) relative to the Court�s Resolution dated February 6, 2001 A.M. No. P-99-1347 ENTITLED Judge Pancracio N. Esca�an & Gloria M. Jamero v. Inocentes M. Monterola II, Clerk of Court II, 3rd MCTC, Kitcharao-Jabonga, Agusan del Norte, the fallo of which reads:
Monterola filed a Motion for Reconsideration which was denied with finality by the Court on June 26, 2001.[3]
On April 8, 2008, the Court herein Petition of Judicial Clemency. Monterola avers that: he has already gravely suffered for years as he could not find sufficient work to support his family; he has served the judiciary from 1957 to 200 with honesty and dedication, until the administrative case which led to his dismissal; he has reformed morally and socially and has exerted efforts to become a respectable member of the community as shown by his participation in various civic and religious activities; and he wants to redeem his lost image, honor and dignity.[4] He prays that the Court grants hi his retirement and other benefits to aid him and his family in the remaining years of his life.[5]
The petition lacks sufficient basis for judicial clemency.
In Re: Letter of the Judge Augustus C. Diaz, Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 37, Appealing for Judicial Clemency,[6] the Court laid down the guidelines in resolving requests for judicial clemency, to wit:
Although he submitted certifications which were dated after his dismissal on February 6, 2001, Monterola procured the same soon after, which cannot be considered sufficient proofs of reformation. He submitted: (1) Certification from Punong Barangay (Brgy.) Recto C. Edioma dated November 22, 2001 stating that Monterola is an honest and law-abiding resident of their barangay; (2) Certificate from the Seventh-day Adventist Church President dated November 20, 2001 stating that Monterola is an active member and elder of their church; (3) Certificate from Northeastern Mindanao Academy Principal, Israel G. Entima dated November 21, 2001 stating that Monterola is honest and was elected President of their Parent-Teachers Associatiion for three terms; (4) Certificate of appreciation from Mayor Narcisita M. Moran dated October 2, 2002 recognizing Monterola�s effort in lecturing certain laws to the Municipal Peace and Order Council; and (5) Resolution No. 11, series of 2002 issued by the Punong Brgy. Dated September 30, 2002, recognizing Monterola�s efforts in lecturing laws at the Brgy. Counsil.[17] Appending said certifications which were issued were close to the date of his dismissal do not show that he has reformed his ways which is was required by the Court in granting clemency. And while he submitted a copy of his Oath of Office dated February 3, 2007 stating that he was elected as Communication and Health Temperance Secretary and President and Church Board Member,[18] this alone does not show change in character contemplated by the Court in a fore stated guidelines.
The Court is aware of factors in Monterola�s favor; these are: his length of service, i.e., a total of 34 years of service to the government, 27 of which were spent in the judiciary;[19] the case which led to his dismissal is his first and only offense; and his advance age, as he was 73 years old as of this time, having been born 1935.[20]
His failure to show his remorse and reformation, however particularly his failure to provide proofs of his reformed character, with updated and recent certifications or testimonials from prominent members of the community with proven integrity and probity restrains the Court from granting his petition as of this time.
WHEREFORE, the petition is denied for lack of merit.�
Azcunna and Tinga, JJ., on official leave.
"A.M. No. P-99-1347 (Formerly OCA I.P.I. Nos. 99-399 and 98-422-P) � In the matter of the Petition for Judicial Clemency: Inocentes M. Monterola II, Clerk of Court II, Municipality Circuit Trial Court, Jabonga-Kitcharao, Agusan del Norte, Petitioner.
Before the Court Petition for Judicial Clemency filed by Inocentes M. Monterola (Monterola) relative to the Court�s Resolution dated February 6, 2001 A.M. No. P-99-1347 ENTITLED Judge Pancracio N. Esca�an & Gloria M. Jamero v. Inocentes M. Monterola II, Clerk of Court II, 3rd MCTC, Kitcharao-Jabonga, Agusan del Norte, the fallo of which reads:
WHEREFORE, the Court orders the dismissal fro the service of Inocentes M. Monterola II, Clerk of Court II, 3rd MCTC, Kitcharao-Jabonga, Agusan del Norte for grave misconduct and usurpation of judicial function, with FORFIETURE of all retirement benefits and accrued leave credits, if any, and with prejudice to re-employment in any branch, agency or instrumentality of the government, including government-owned or controlled corporations.The Court found that Monterola, who was then Clerk of Court of the Municipality Circuit Trial Court went beyond his duties and usurped judicial functions when he ordered the arrest of Gloria M. Jamero; that there was no prior order from the judge; and that the arrest was done in complete disregard of the rights of the accused.[2]
SO ORDERED.[1]
Monterola filed a Motion for Reconsideration which was denied with finality by the Court on June 26, 2001.[3]
On April 8, 2008, the Court herein Petition of Judicial Clemency. Monterola avers that: he has already gravely suffered for years as he could not find sufficient work to support his family; he has served the judiciary from 1957 to 200 with honesty and dedication, until the administrative case which led to his dismissal; he has reformed morally and socially and has exerted efforts to become a respectable member of the community as shown by his participation in various civic and religious activities; and he wants to redeem his lost image, honor and dignity.[4] He prays that the Court grants hi his retirement and other benefits to aid him and his family in the remaining years of his life.[5]
The petition lacks sufficient basis for judicial clemency.
In Re: Letter of the Judge Augustus C. Diaz, Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 37, Appealing for Judicial Clemency,[6] the Court laid down the guidelines in resolving requests for judicial clemency, to wit:
Monterola sought to prove his remorse and reformation by attaching certificates of participation in several seminars and lectures. Most of the certificates he attached however pertain in activities he participated in before his dismissal from the service on February 6, 2001. These are: (1) Certificate of Appreciation issued by the Municipal Mayor of Kitcharao dated September 17, 1997 for conducting a Seminar-Workshop for the Lupon Members on September 6 to 9, 1994,[8] (2) Certificate of Participation from the Provincial Governor dated June 8, 1999 for participating in the Anti-Drug Abuse Seminar held on the same date;[9] (3) Certificate of Recognition dated March 12, 1999 signed by Captain Raul Laru-an and Major Leonardo Orbase for participating as Lecturer in their Katarungang Pambarangay Program Orientation;[10](4) Appointment and Oath of Office as Lupon Member dated July 1979;[11] (5) Certificate dated May 8, 1997 from the Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) stating that Monterola has attended the Convention-Seminar on May 7-9, 1997 in Tagbilaran Cuty;[12] (6) Certificate from (PHILJA) dated September 2, 1997 stating that Monterola attended the Seminar on the same date, on the 1997 Rules of Service Procedure for Clerks of Court:[13] (7) Certificate of Attendance from the PHILJA for the Convention-Seminar of the Union of Clerks of Court of the Philippines conducted on April 16-18, 1999, at Cagayan de Oro;[14] (8) Certificate of Completion dated June 18, 1999 issued by the University of the Philippines, Law Center, stating that Monterola participated in the General Law Practice Institute conducted on April 17 to 18, 1999;[15] and (9) Certificate of Recto C. Edioma dated November 22, 2001 which refers to lectures he conducted on September 6 to 9, 1994 for the lupon member in Kitcharao.[16]
- There must be proof of remorse and reformation. These shall include but should not be limited to certifications or testimonials of xxx prominent members of the community with proven integrity and probity. A subsequent finding of guilt in an administrative case for the same or similar misconduct will give rise to a strong presumption of non-reformation.
- Sufficient time must have lapsed from the imposition of the penalty to ensure a period of reformation.
- The age of the person asking for Clemency must show that he still has productive years ahead of him that can be put to good use by giving a chance to redeem himself.
- There must be a showing of promise (such as intellectual aptitude, learning or legal acumen or contribution to legal scholarship and the development of the legal system or administrative or other relevant skills), as well as potential for public service.
- There must be other relevant factors and circumstances that may justify clemency.[7]
Although he submitted certifications which were dated after his dismissal on February 6, 2001, Monterola procured the same soon after, which cannot be considered sufficient proofs of reformation. He submitted: (1) Certification from Punong Barangay (Brgy.) Recto C. Edioma dated November 22, 2001 stating that Monterola is an honest and law-abiding resident of their barangay; (2) Certificate from the Seventh-day Adventist Church President dated November 20, 2001 stating that Monterola is an active member and elder of their church; (3) Certificate from Northeastern Mindanao Academy Principal, Israel G. Entima dated November 21, 2001 stating that Monterola is honest and was elected President of their Parent-Teachers Associatiion for three terms; (4) Certificate of appreciation from Mayor Narcisita M. Moran dated October 2, 2002 recognizing Monterola�s effort in lecturing certain laws to the Municipal Peace and Order Council; and (5) Resolution No. 11, series of 2002 issued by the Punong Brgy. Dated September 30, 2002, recognizing Monterola�s efforts in lecturing laws at the Brgy. Counsil.[17] Appending said certifications which were issued were close to the date of his dismissal do not show that he has reformed his ways which is was required by the Court in granting clemency. And while he submitted a copy of his Oath of Office dated February 3, 2007 stating that he was elected as Communication and Health Temperance Secretary and President and Church Board Member,[18] this alone does not show change in character contemplated by the Court in a fore stated guidelines.
The Court is aware of factors in Monterola�s favor; these are: his length of service, i.e., a total of 34 years of service to the government, 27 of which were spent in the judiciary;[19] the case which led to his dismissal is his first and only offense; and his advance age, as he was 73 years old as of this time, having been born 1935.[20]
His failure to show his remorse and reformation, however particularly his failure to provide proofs of his reformed character, with updated and recent certifications or testimonials from prominent members of the community with proven integrity and probity restrains the Court from granting his petition as of this time.
WHEREFORE, the petition is denied for lack of merit.�
Azcunna and Tinga, JJ., on official leave.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA
Clerk of Court
(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA
Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] Rollo, pp. 396-407.
[2] Id. at 403-404.
[3] Id. at 400-417
[4] Rollo, pp. 441-470
[5] Id. at 441-470
[6] A.M. No. 07-7-17-SC, September 19, 2007, 533 SCRA 534.
[7] Id. at 539.
[8] Id. at 452.
[9] Id. at 453.
[10] Rollo, p. 454.
[11] Id. at 455-456.
[12] Rollo, p. 462.
[13] Id. at 463.
[14] Id. at 464.
[15] Id. at 465.
[16] Id. at 451.
[17] Id. at 451,451-461.
[18] Id. at 458.
[19] Rollo, pp. 444-447.
[20] In Diaz, supra, Gonzales La�O and Co., Inc. v. Hatab, A.M. No. P-99-13337, January 25, 2006, 480 SCRA 32, and Junio V. Rivera, A.M. No. MTJ-91-565, October 5, 2005, 472 SCRA 69, the Court considered respondent�s length of service in government and the fact that their respective cases were their first and only offense in granting their pleas for clemency. In Junio, the Court also considered respondent�s regressing physical condition and old age in their favor.
